WATCH, true colours

The Rt Revd Philip North, Bishop of Blackburn                   Source: Geoff Crawford/Church Times

 

A Review of the appointment of the Rt Revd Philip North as Bishop of Blackburn has concluded that his nomination followed the proper processes, but makes several recommendations how these processes could be improved.

The Church Times reports that

 "Campaigners had raised concerns about Bishop North’s views on the ordination of women, which he has said is an area on which the Church of England should not be at variance with the wider Church (News, 15 September 2017).

"A submission by the campaign group Women and the Church (WATCH) centred on concerns about how having a bishop who does not ordain women could undermine clergy in the diocese and the diocesan bishop’s function as a figure of unity..."

Forward in Faith commented:

"The Independent Reviewer has rightly restated that, following a submission to her from Women and the Church (WATCH) regarding the appointment of diocesan bishops in the Church of England and in line with the Church’s Five Guiding Principles, being a traditionalist is not a bar to becoming a diocesan bishop.

"However, Forward in Faith also notes with concern that the Independent Reviewer has recommended in her report that consideration be given to re-examining the scope of her role. It is not clear to Forward in Faith from the contents of the report exactly what deficiency in the current arrangements would be met by such a change.

"As WATCH has demonstrated in its referral on the appointment of diocesan bishops, any individual or interested party can make a referral to the Independent Reviewer. The Independent Reviewer can then assess the points made in those referrals.

"The critical question must always be how those referrals relate to the 2014 House of Bishops’ Declaration on the Ministry of Bishops and Priests. If there has been any breach of that Declaration, from whatever part of the Church it might have come, then it needs to be addressed directly and transparently. However, simply not agreeing with, or feeling uncomfortable with, the contents of the Declaration can never be, and should never be, grounds for a referral to the Independent Reviewer.

"The direction of travel being opened up by the Independent Reviewer runs the risk of undermining the Declaration, which quite rightly seeks to promote the flourishing of all parts of the Church and to uphold and protect the minority position in the Church of England, which in part occurs through the work of the Independent Reviewer.

"Forward in Faith remains strongly of the view that the Church of England benefits from the breadth of its witness, including the catholic teaching and practice which it holds in common with the universal Church."

Once again WATCH show themselves in their true colours as a group of feminists using the Church to further their feminist cause regardless of the effect on others.

Brood of vipers!

"To expect someone whose theological conviction does not enable him to receive the sacramental ministry of women routinely to turn up to a celebration of Holy Communion when he cannot discover in advance whether he will be able to receive Holy Communion seems to me to be asking too much."

The words of Sir William Fittall in response to a complaint by an orthodox Anglican who claimed he was being "marginalised" because he was forced to arrive at services  at Wakefield Cathedral without prior knowledge of whether there would be a male or female celebrant.

That will have a familiar ring for readers of this blog. In Welsh Primate abandons twin integrity I wrote:

" In his newly created role of Acting Dean of his own Cathedral, the dictatorial Archbishop of Wales and Bishop of Llandaff, Dr Barry Morgan, has decreed that the Cathedral Office is not to publish the names of officiants at each of the Cathedral services. The intention is to put a further barrier in the way of those who, for theological reasons, are uncomfortable with a woman presiding at the altar. Rather than being able to plan ahead to avoid unfortunate pastoral situations, it would appear that the only way of knowing who is celebrating the Eucharist at Llandaff is to see who appears at the entrance procession. 

"This action again illustrates that there is nothing so intolerant as an arch-liberal. If this is the level of pastoral care shown by the Archbishop in his own Cathedral for those who are told they still have an honoured place in his Church, what hope is there for the rest of us? "

The Dean of Wakefield Cathedral argued that "Removing the names of those - male and female - who are to preside at a particular service helps to make the point that it is our offering of the Eucharist that is central, rather than the particular individual who is presiding."

In the Anglican Church orthodoxy has become a hindrance resulting in outright discrimination.

Transgenders are thought by the House of Bishops to deserve a special welcome service while LGBT Anglicans have their own chaplains and LGBT Masses, often with the Lord's Table draped in a rainbow flag.

Orthodox Anglicans have to fend for themselves, often having to take steps to avoid being trapped into embarrassing situations as in Wakefield Cathedral.

Yet women priests still complain. "Not everybody accepts us” sighs England's first female priest as she casually trots out more secular propaganda about equality: "Despite the many advancements in equality that the Church of England has seen in the past few years, there is always room for further progress. One should never sit on one’s laurels and while there are pockets of resistance, it’s nice to kind of think we’ll persevere until there aren't any, but that’s probably being unrealistic.”

Presumably the pockets of resistance she refers to are orthodox Anglicans such as the "nice woman" who is "not hostile" to her but just can’t accept that women can be priests so she wont accept communion from her, and the worshipper in Wakefield Cathedral forced to complain because of a wilful failure to honour the agreement that enabled women to be ordained in the Church of England.

In its 'Five Guiding Principles', the Church of England says it is "fully and unequivocally committed to all orders of ministry being open to all irrespective of gender". But the principles also state: "Those whose theological convictions mean they are unable to receive the ministry of women bishops or priests continue to be within the spectrum of teaching and tradition of the Anglican Communion, so the church of England remains committed to enabling them to flourish"

With hindsight it appears that the revisionists had no intention of honouring the pledge intended to enable orthodox Anglicans to flourish.

In September 2018 a row broke out in the diocese of Oxford because an advert for a new vicar at St Barnabas and St Paul with St Thomas the Martyr Parish specified that it was seeking a male priest.

The Oxford Mail reported that the advert provoked outrage in the community with one councillor 'slamming the church' for being 'too cowardly' to confront misogyny.

In their pursuit of power Women in the Church have talked of equality rather than theology permitting false accusations of misogyny and discrimination in the Church.

The former Archbishop of Wales Dr Barry Morgan used similar tactics when he wrote of "discrimination in a church that believes there is 'no male or female' in Christ". He used one of the most misquoted verses in all of Scripture, in an attempt to hoodwink his readers.

He went further saying, "At the heart of the Christian gospel are values of integrity, justice, wholeness and inclusion". Values he and his brood have consciously neglected to apply to Anglicans who keep the faith as received.

Seeking to validate their dishonesty they claim that the Church has to be credible to outsiders. In doing so they have allowed feminism to take control and substituted sex for love as they scratch around in scripture looking for any reference they can take out of context to boost their cause.

The latest row over whether gay bishops attending the 2020 Lambeth Conference should bring their same-sex partners as guests illustrates how far Anglicans have moved away from the gospel. Nigel Evans MP said that he believes the rule could equate to workplace discrimination adding that "If it wasn't for the gays in the Church, the Church would crumble"!

Unable to distinguish between faith and secular fads, people outside no longer care what the Church has to say. The Anglican Church has successfully made itself 'more relevant' to society, losing the sense of otherness which had set her apart in the process.

The revisionists speak not for Christ but for themselves. They use their own interpretation of the gospel to support a preferred lifestyle while recruiting secular opinion to justify their cause.

The Dean of Wakefield Cathedral talked of the centrality of offering the Eucharist while the Acting of Dean of Llandaff, Archbishop Barry Morgan, wrote of sanctioning schism, threatening the unity of the church if he supported calls for a male bishop with jurisdiction for those who oppose the authority of a woman bishop.

The Holy Eucharist has become a weapon in support of claims that are not only unsupported by but condemned by most members of the Anglican Communion, the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church.

Pilate asked the crowd whom he should release to them, Barabbas or Jesus? The chief priests and elders persuaded the crowd to chose Barabbas.

What is the choice offered today? The Gospel of Christ or crowd pleasing liberalism?

Women in the Church

The 'dark' side.

"Women bishops would humanise the priesthood" said the then Archbishop of Canterbury in 2011. Dr Rowan Williams warned the Church hierarchy to prepare for the “culture change” that would come with the “full inclusion” of women. Not the full inclusion the Archbishop would have expected. Instead it is inclusion to the exclusion of anyone with views not in accord with Women and the Church (WATCH) and their fellow travellers as highlighted by the "Sheffield controversy".

At the time Ann Widdecombe was closer to the truth when she said,  "Christianity in Britain today is under severe persecution. And it will get much worse. I do not resent this persecution. I welcome it. For it will weed out the pseudo-Christians, the wimpish bishops and the caved-in Synod. By persecution we discover who our true friends actually are." In 2017 that has come to pass.

Feminists have mercilessly used the Church for their own political ends. On the face of it WATCH ran a legitimate campaign, as they saw it, for the ordination of women. But, as with the world wide web, there is a dark side. A deception which has been gnawing away at the soft underbelly of Anglicanism. Say anything, do anything to gain the advantage. Thus the five guiding principles were agreed allowing women to become bishops in the Church of England. Perhaps they were crossing their fingers behind their backs as they voted but either way, they have reneged on the agreement rendering the whole procedure untenable.

Critics of WATCH were accused of misogyny from the earliest days when Canon Lucy Winkett said in a keynote speech, "Never mind Gordon Ramsay, we have in modern society a new F-word: Feminism." Extracts from her speech can be read here, eg,

Now women are on the inside, are exercising authority in
state and church, although the power is not yet equally
shared and the pay is certainly not equal. We are in a
new situation; I am not here to make a case for women
to be bishops – that case is obvious...

From the historical perspective of exclusion, women are
able to speak with authority from long centuries of marginalisation,
to bring these perspectives into the decision
making structures of society and church.

In the West, we live in a half changed world. There are
now very few areas of public life not open to women –
except those protected by organised religion."

In their campaign WATCH have used Christian values as a weapon to secure an advantage over their target audience, secularists and Anglicans who have been brought up on 'love thy neighbour', 'turn the other cheek', etc. Many have been bullied into submission for fear of being branded un-Christian while the majority outside the Church either do not care or have become so secularised they no longer understand the issues. When Bishop Philip North withdrew from his appointment as Bishop of Sheffield a BBC News reader said it was because 'his congregation' had complained.

Similar tactics, including false accusations, are being used by LGBT campaigners to bully the Bench of Bishops of the Church in Wales into appointing the Dean of St Albans to Llandaff. In an undignified campaign Members of Parliament have become involved. They have been led to believe that Dr John has suffered discrimination because he is in a civil partnership.

The MPs wrote "We understand that Dr John, a fluent Welsh speaker, was born in Tonyrefail in 1953. He grew up there and went to Hertford College, Oxford where studied both Classics and Modern Languages and was awarded a First. He was ordained to a title at Holy Nativity, Penarth. From Penarth he went back to Oxford to study for a DPhil and became Dean of Divinity to Magdalen College."

Many Welsh Anglicans have been asking themselves why, as a fluent Welsh speaker, Dr John was not appointed to St Davids in what looks more than ever like the politically motivated appointment of the first woman bishop in Wales. A gay priest and friend of Dr John’s for 40 years said "There’s homophobia everywhere but that’s no reason to stop a gay person from becoming a Bishop."

It is not homophobia and not because Dr John is gay and living in a civil partnership. The reasons why Dr John was rejected are open to speculation but for Church members who have been alerted to the controversy it is because he has campaigned for same sex marriage in Church which was rejected by the Governing Body. Moreover, he has used an unorthodox interpretation of the Bible account of the healing of the centurion’s servant in Luke 7 to justify his stance.

Looking to feminism, to gay rights or any other secular cause to swell congregations is not what the Church is about. That has failed. Decline continues. False claims by campaigners are leading astray a politically correct audience for selfish, political ends. That is not the Way of the Cross.