The Victim

Women in the Church were victims, allegedly. Gays, lesbians and transgenders in the Church are victims, allegedly. 

The true Victim was left hanging on the Cross. His words have been twisted to justify sectional interests to the detriment of the Church. The latest episode is witnessed by the LGBT campaign to have the high profile gay cleric Jeffrey John elected bishop of Llandaff.

Dr John says the bench of bishops is guilty of homophobia. This is the bench which wrote:

“Dear brothers and sisters in Christ,

We recognise that you have often been persecuted and ostracized by the Church for your sexuality, that you have been mistreated by the Church, and forced into secrecy and dissimulation by the attitudes of prejudice which you have faced.  We deplore such hostility, and welcome and affirm the words of the Primates that condemn homophobic prejudice and violence.  We too commit ourselves to offering you the same loving service and pastoral care to which all humanity is entitled, and we commit ourselves to acting to provide a safe space within the Church and within our communities in which you can be honest and open, respected and affirmed."

Jeffrey John claims in an open letter to the Bishop of Swansea and Brecon that his situation is exactly similar to that of the Bishop of Grantham who is also in a same sex relationship. It may be insofar as civil partnerships are concerned but I have found no record of Bishop Chamberlain supporting the Out4Marriage campaign, twisting the Bible to support his stance.

Dr John also suggests that same sex couples are no different to infertile couples, or couples who are beyond the age of childbearing. He is badly mistaken. Addressing gay people directly in his Out4Marriage video Dr John claims that "the official church doesn't speak with integrity... so frankly doesn't deserve to be listened to". That does not bode well for the mission of the Church or for bench collegiality. It is a  pick and mix form of Christianity which leads John to claim that "God is Out4Marriage too"!

In his letter to the bishop of Swansea and Brecon who is the Church in Wales' most senior bishop, Dr John said he had been told by "a bishop present at the meeting of the electoral college" that “a number of homophobic remarks were made and were left unchecked and unreprimanded by the chair”. [My emphasis - Ed.]

For members of the Electoral College to leak information is a serious breach of confidence but for a bishop? He or she should seriously consider his/her position.

Regular churchgoers are dying out, literally and metaphorically. Those who have not been pressured into leaving and battle-on are fed up with gays and feminists claiming to be badly treated when the Church clearly has so many women clergy and gay people in their midst.

In England Archbishop Justin Welby appears to have sold out to Women and the Church (WATCH) despite their shameless campaign against Bishop Philip North because he is an orthodox Anglican. Read the history of this sorry saga here.

In Wales Archbishop Barry Morgan led the bishops into battle against Church members promoting same sex marriage. At the same time he was desperately engineering the election of the first woman bishop in Wales before he retired. His candidate also complained of discrimination. On investigation it proved to be nothing of the sort. One stitch-up is one too many.

I hope that the Bench has at last come to its senses. People need to hear about Christ crucified not false claims of victimhood.

Postscript [21.03.2017]

Unsurprisingly given the gay men's chorus which is singing ever louder to Jeffrey John's tune, the LGB pressure group OneBodyOneFaith this morning published an open letter (here) expressing their "concerns" about the way the process to appoint a bishop for the See of Llandaff has been handled. One of the signatories is the Rev Jeremy Pemberton, Chair for the Board of Trustee. It was he who thumbed his nose to the Church of England over the gay marriage issue.

OBOF have only Jeffrey John's word for what took place. That is second hand. There is no context, merely accusation. "The reported unanimity of the Llandaff electors is a strong indication of what they wish to happen" they write. There are two points here. It was common knowledge that many in Llandaff were desperate to avoid a woman bishop. Their best hope of avoiding that eventuality was to support Jeffrey John. Also, given the strong gay presence in Llandaff, the impression given is that many if not all form part of the chorus demanding that Jeffery John should be the bishop-elect.

As we approach Passiontide  the baying crowd becomes louder. There are echoes of "Give us Barabbas". The crowd had it wrong. So does OBOF and the media. Pray that the Bench withstands the media onslaught.

Fit for purpose?

Archbishop of Wales, Rt Rev Barry Morgan, at the National Eisteddfod                      Credit: Daily Post

In a 2011 BBC video clip (here) the Archbishop of Wales claimed that we needed to look to see if the Church in Wales (CinW) is "fit for purpose" and if we are using our resources in the best possible kind of way because investment income is falling, the pension bill is rising and therefore more money is needed by the church. Dr Morgan said the organisation needs outside help to cope with the decline in clergy, waning investments and falling congregations. He warned that the Church needed to be ready for significant change and take whatever proposals the Review may come up with seriously to make it fit for a future in Wales.

Unsurprisingly in 2012 the Review duly reported that the Church is “burdened and hampered” by too many aspects of organisation, and the parish system, as originally set up with a single priest serving a small community, was no longer sustainable.

No time has been lost in dismantling the parish system while cutting parish clergy but the top-heavy management structure remains in tact and peripheral appointments abound. For an example see the Llandaff structure here. No wonder the CinW has no future.

According to research reported in the 'Church Growth Modelling' Blog, the CinW will be extinct within a generation. The date of "around 2040" may prove to be optimistic. If a rumour circulating proves to be correct, CinW regular Sunday attendance figures are down by a massive 10% on the 2013 figure of 31,000 to only 28,000.

There are a number of factors. There is a limit to the willingness of members to support an organisation which has become so divorced from their Credal beliefs that it ceases to be credible. Many orthodox Anglicans have remained in the CinW because it has been their spiritual home since their baptism. They have found no suitable alternative but there comes a point when habit becomes unsustainable.

Also, the sense of 'belonging' to ministry areas, which will depend for their existence on lay worker assistants, does not have the same spiritual dimension as being able to call on one's parish priest if needed. *

It is obvious to many that the decline of Anglicanism in Great Britain has accelerated as the Church has become 'more relevant' to society. If this trend is continued and the Archbishop successfully convinces the Governing Body that same-sex marriage is the best thing since sliced bread, steeper decline seems inevitable.

So fit for purpose? No. Money may make "the world go round" but it does nothing for the "prosperity of the soul", a point seemingly lost on the Bench of Bishops.

* Postscript [11.08.2015]
   See 'Lots of Lay Leaders Licensed' here.

True to his word: "Over my dead body!"

Archbishop Morgan, now unofficial
supreme governor of the Church in Wales

I keep asking myself the question, is Barry Morgan deluded, a hypocrite or simply a liar? My wife's view is that he is consumed which would explain why secular issues consistently cloud his judgement on religious matters and why he has remained true to his word that there would be alternative Episcopal oversight 'over his dead body'. 

Consistency in victory when some dared hope that he would show magnanimity is the saddest commentary on his reign as Archbishop. The long awaited announcement giving details of the Code of Practice creates a smokescreen of generosity but in reality there is to be no alternative to one of the existing bishops, all of whom dissent from the Apostolic tradition of the Holy Catholic Church.

The Presidential Address which the Archbishop read on behalf of the Bench of Bishops must be one of the longest execution notes in history. The heading 'Code for Women Bishops aims to keep all included' defines it. It is a Code of Practice written for women bishops, not for loyal Church members with conscientious doubts about their authenticity.

The disingenuity in the Presidential Address does the Church no credit. Dr Morgan laughingly speaks of compassion. He uses scripture and tradition in the most disingenuous way to suggest that his view can be justified by the Bible and life in the early Church, completely ignoring Christ's example and the more authoritative views of The Church, East and West.

Not surprisingly this is how the Code is represented in the press: "It states that anyone who objects to being ordained by a woman bishop can make a written request for it to be carried out by a man" (here).

Let me make this abundantly clear to the Archbishop and the Bench:

  Acceptable provision is NOT about sex, it is about FAITH. 

What I found most appalling was the way pieces favourable to the Archbishop's views have been cherry picked, twisting them to his own advantage. For example, the explanatory note starts by mirroring the arrangements adopted in the Church of England but instead of going on to make similar provision for those for whom the Code is intended, Dr Morgan's terms are substituted. 

 [Provision 3] A diocesan bishop shall make for such members within their dioceses all reasonable provision for appropriate sacramental episcopal ministry on such occasions as necessary upon submission of a request in writing from those individuals supported by their parish priest. 

Leaving aside how 'reasonable' may be interpreted, supposing a woman Bishop of St Davids receives a request which one of the two remaining male bishops, in Bangor and St Asaph, would be willing to fulfil. If those bishops were unable or unwilling to travel, presumably the candidate(s) would have to travel to Bangor or St Asaph at his/her/their own expense. But, more importantly, what is the position when all the bishops are women or is it assumed that the Church in Wales will be dead by then based on continuing decline?

Making provision for a woman bishop to request a man to officiate represents NO CHANGE to the position since the first and only Provincial Assistant Bishop, the Rt Rev David Thomas retired. What is needed is a bishop who believes in the same Apostolic tradition. Dr Morgan is correct when he says that the appointment of another Provincial Assistant Bishop is not appropriate, not for the reasons he outlined but because he could not in conscience be an assistant to a bishop whose faith differs from his own.

The remedy is simple. Allow a Society Bishop to cross the Welsh border to provide the sacramental assurance lacking in the Bench's scheme. It didn't bother the bishops when women bishops from the Episcopal Church crossed the border to celebrate un-canonically in Llandaff and St Asaph Cathedrals so what's the problem?

Compassion is defined in the Oxford dictionary as "Sympathetic pity and concern for the sufferings or misfortunes of others" from Middle English via Old French from ecclesiastical Latin compassio(n-), from compati 'suffer with'. 

Dr Morgan said:

The gospels are also full of stories about the compassion of Jesus – for Him, compassion was God’s defining characteristic. To be compassionate means feeling the feelings of someone else at a level below the level of the head. It is entering into somebody else’s pain and being moved to do something about it. Yet, for the chief religious leaders of Jesus’ day, the chief characteristic of God was not compassion but holiness and holiness meant separation from everything that was unclean. Ancient Jewish society was based on a system of purity where everything was classified as either impure or pure, clean or unclean.

He added:

The Code of Practice we have produced has not been produced for the benefit of one side or the other in the debate but for the whole church. That is what you asked us to do. The Bill explicitly says that the Code should be drawn up in such a way that every member of the Church in Wales might feel secure. In other words, this Code is not just for those who in conscience dissent but is a code for every member of the Church in Wales.

It is difficult to see how the majority of members of the Church in Wales could feel insecure. They have what they want. What this Code of Practice achieves, by accident or design, is to give the impression that the minority are the new 'unclean' but without the Petrine vision.

That is a disgrace which needs to be rectified. Under the Code "the Bench reserves the right to amend the provisions of this Code as may be necessary". I hope the Bench will, on reflection, have the backbone to do so with or without Dr Morgan's approval. If he believes in the collegiate view, let's hear it or will they all go down in history tarred with the same brush?

Barry's sexist agenda.

The Bunch of 'Bishops'

Charged with drawing up the Code of Practice required to accompany the authorising of women bishops in the Church in Wales, the Archbishop and his bench sitters have, true to form, produced something sexist to provide for the type of woman Barry has encouraged and who will feel comfortable with the result despite the implied intention to make provision for Church members who cannot accept the ordination of women on grounds of conscience. On this occasion he has managed to make all his bench sitters culpable.

Appalled by the deviousness of his Presidential Address I shall confine myself, for now anyway, to commenting on some tweeted remarks from Governing Body which I found interesting:

"What will you do during this Governing Body to build up our church in the body of Christ?' asks Sion in his Bible reflection". - Sounds like a good start!

"The Archbishop begins his Presidential Address and says this time it is a joint address from the Bench of Bishops". - Dire warning; all are culpable.

"Christ's was an inclusive, not exclusive ministry, says the Archbishop. But sometimes the Church has been exclusive,causing schisms" - Barry should know better than most!

"Crucial question is how do we respect difference and diversity within the Church, says the Archbishop" - Listen to those for whom the Code of Practice was supposedly intended?

"Bishops undertook an extensive listening process across the Province as they drew up the Code of Practice" - but turned a deaf ear to anything they did not want to hear.

"The Code of Practice for women bishops is for every single member of the church, not for just one group, says the Archbishop" - One tweeter grasped the point that under the inclusive code, a woman must be able to demand a woman bishop. Belief apparently is irrelevant. Only sex matters.

"We, as your bishops, see Christ at work in all our members, married or single, gay or straight, old or young.' - Archbishop" - Always provided that they are an acceptable minority who do not follow the teaching of the Holy Catholic Church.

"We perceive the call of God in women to all orders, and we are respectful of the faith of those who cannot receive such ministry" - You could have fooled me Archbishop.

"In these issues, as in others, we invite the Church to unite in the greater task of proclaiming the Gospel" - But only as Barry sees it.

The BBC report (here) is as sexist as is the Archbishop's approach to the Code. There is nothing to suggest that objections on grounds of conscience are because the bishops' beliefs differ from those held by the Holy Catholic Church of which we claim to belong.

Postscript:

WALES: The Washed Up World of the Anglican Church of Wales

From Virtueonline here