A welcome U-turn

The lady may not have been for turning but fortunately George is. He may have been surprised at the level of criticism of some of his budget proposals but his U-turn on charitable giving is most welcome. Well done George!

It's not a job for Christ's sake!

Photo: Getty Images

My hope that the spirit of unity and Godly love would be allowed to settle on the Church of England at Pentecost was short-lived. The response from the former Chair of WATCH to the amendments agreed  by the House of Bishops to the draft Measure concerning the ordination of women as bishops is uncompromising: "Churchgoers in Cambridgeshire could turn up to find the pulpit empty if 'furious' campaigners for female bishops in the Church of England carry out their threats to strike. Christina Rees, a lay preacher in Barley who has been a member of the General Synod, the church’s parliament, for 20 years, told the News there is 'uproar' over last-minute changes to new legislation. .... American-born Ms Rees, who is a leading campaigner for female bishops, told the News many members of the church are threatening to leave in protest and there are loud calls for strike action."

In an earlier outburst the Rev Miranda Threlfall-Holmes, questioned why women should stay in an “abusive institution”: “Do we stay, hoping it will get better? Do we stay, because we feel called by God to be in this marriage? Do we stay, thinking we can continue to try to change it from the inside? Or do we flee to the nearest refuge (let's ignore the fact for now that they rarely exist) — leaving home, family, community, and our dreams behind?" Dr Threlfall-Holmes should have realised that the cost of discipleship is not easy and certainly not one to be defined by secular employment laws. 

We have been here before with threats from women clergy to leave unless they get their own way. This vociferous group which campaigns for parity in employment based on false claims of inequality have dictated the direction the Anglican Church for far too long using bully-boy tactics which have nothing to do with religion. Equality of opportunity in the work place is their guiding principle; faith is secondary, if it figures at all. The call now by Christina Rees to use their not inconsiderable feminist muscle to threaten the stability of the church clearly illustrates what the feminist movement has been up to all along. It is time to call their bluff. They do not want to serve, only to be served, accepting no authority but their own. As they have often told those who disagree with them, it's your choice. For Christ's sake and that of His church, take it or leave it.

Come Holy Ghost, our souls inspire

The feast of Pentecost brings to a close Novena 2012 when we have been praying for unity and generosity of spirit so that our church may be truly inclusive. Pentecost is the feast people of my generation associate with the Whitsun treat. What better treat could there be than for the Holy Spirit to inspire Christ's disciples to live together in peace and Godly love, each allowing the other to worship according to custom and conscience.

The Church of England, US style

As churches have continued to empty throughout Wales during Dr Barry Morgan's reign as Archbishop (over 15% according to figures reaching me), VirtueOnline paints a depressing picture of the direction of the Crown Nominations Commission now thought likely "to be driven by TEC supporters, headed by the Archbishop of Wales, Barry Morgan who is closely aligned with the full agenda of the Episcopal Church that includes the likes of New Westminster Bishop Michael Ingham, TEC Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori, Canadian Anglican Archbishop Fred Hiltz and many others." 

God help us!


Postscript
More from the Telegraph here.

  

Comment is free

From Women's Views on News

Church faces crisis over 'tainted' women bishops plan ran the headline in the Telegraph: Historic plans to allow women to become bishops have been plunged into crisis after existing bishops voted through an eleventh-hour concession to traditionalists. In this article the dramatic headlines are balanced by wide ranging comments from interested parties. The Independent put it this way: Supporters of women bishops have rounded on senior leaders within the Church of England after they inserted last minute amendments to proposed legislation that will allow female clergy to hold the highest levels of office alongside their male colleagues.

Both papers presented intelligible reports on what Ruth Gledhill described as the worst -written press release since the Reformation. A less balanced view emerged in the Guardian's Comment is free including this revelation: [The Rev] "Miranda Threlfall Holmes, whose piece demanding no changes at all we published on Saturday, put up an embarrassing blogpost comparing the bishops to a particularly disgusting man who had gouged his wife's eyes out and then kept her in the house for 12 hours to stop her getting medical attention. She has subsequently taken down the post, which she now calls intemperate. I think she has been spending altogether too much time caring about Anglican politics." *
Last year Mrs Briton became incensed, and is still, after reading a bishop's view that "The ordination of women will rid the world of homophobia, misogyny, brutalisation of women in all situations including those in war zones."

However bizarre their views at least these people have an 'insider's' view of the direction in which they think the church should be heading, usually from the spiritual to the secular, but taking Comment is free as an example, it is amazing how many secularists feel free to pass comment on people's faith when faith clearly has no meaning for them. Worst of all, though, is insiders who should be people of faith using views of secularist outsiders to bolster arguments against those in the church for whom faith really matters.


* More from the Telegraph here.

Graceless

It didn't take WATCH long to respond to the House of Bishops discussion on the proposed Women Bishops Legislation:

"WATCH (Women and the Church) is deeply disappointed to hear that the all male House of Bishops has, in a closed meeting, decided to make two amendments to the draft legislation on women bishops that had been so carefully crafted after years of debate and scrutiny from all sides and had commanded the support of 42/44 dioceses across the Church of England.

They have failed to listen to the voice of ordained women and those who support their ministry and been swayed by those who are opposed into making concessions that can only undermine the ministry of women in future years.  Their decision to intervene in this way will significantly undermine the credibility of the House of Bishops both inside and outside the Church. The exact wording of the amendments is not in the House of Bishops’ Press Release, nor are the figures of how many bishops voted for and against them. WATCH will be considering the amendments in detail over coming days and will issue a full response in due course.

The Reverend Rachel Weir, Chair of WATCH said: “The House of Bishops’ intervention will be an enormous blow to the morale of women clergy who were looking to their bishops for clear affirmation of their ministry as a welcome gift to the Church.”

So the "all male" House of Bishops has, in a "closed meeting", failed to listen to the voice of ordained women. Perhaps instead they took note of the 2,200 women who had the opportunity to petition the House of Bishops against women bishops but I doubt it. In a complex amendment procedure the House of Bishops appear to be saying that women bishops would be in charge but there may be circumstances in which traditional Anglicans should receive a modicum of respect for their deeply held religious convictions, something that WATCH appeared to agree with back in 2008. But that has been part of their deception throughout their campaign. Gain ground then put the boot in.

Crown Nominations Commission: Fair play?

Today I spotted this interesting observation from the American Anglican Council on the Archbishop of Canterbury selection procedure:

   "Finally, with regard to the larger Anglican Communion, we see the revisionist elite in the Church of England and the current politicians in Parliament working together to produce a desired outcome in the selection of the next Archbishop of Canterbury. The fact that the Archbishop and Primate of Wales, Barry Morgan, will sit on the Crown Nominations Commission (CNC) is absurd. Wales is a miniscule church, with fewer and fewer people attending church practically every week. Archbishop Rowan Williams was the previous Primate of Wales, and he did such a good job of shrinking the Welch Church that they made him Archbishop of Canterbury. Now Rowan's successor Barry Morgan, who has continued Dr. Williams' work of shrinking the church, is to sit on the commission that will nominate the next Archbishop of Canterbury. Another person who has been chosen to sit on the CNC is the Rev. Kenneth Kearon, who as the head of the Anglican Communion Office helps to foist the revisionist agenda of the Anglican elite onto the rest of the Communion. What does Kearon bring to the Commission if not the desires of the liberal elite of the Church of England and the revisionist West?" Full text here.

Dr Morgan's appointment has already attracted criticism here with some choice comments here. While I cannot comment on the possible shrinkage of the Church in Wales when Rowan Williams was Archbishop, in the September 2011 edition of 'Highlights' the Church in Wales published some disastrous Membership and Finance details. They were hidden away on the back page of a document that trumpeted Equal Opportunities for all in the Church, all who matter that is - see this report from the Let nothing you dismay Blog.


I am told by those close to him that the Archbishop of Wales feels hurt when people are unkind to him, that is, whenever people disagree with him. If people hold to their creed they are not being unkind, rather they are defending the faith. If Dr Morgan and his modern liberal friends followed Christ's example rather than spending their time trying to force their own agendas onto the Anglican Church (here and here) we wouldn't be in the mess in which we now find ourselves with declining membership, shortage of funds and constant squabbling about secular issues which have nothing whatsoever to do with the faith of the wider Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. So the question has to be asked, do they believe what they recite in the Creed? If not, all becomes clear.