There are also strong voices in society questioning the place of religion in public life. The barbarians of Bideford are at the gate. They say that faith is a private thing, and they imagine for themselves superior neutrality. Well, part of the Act of Uniformity was that we should live together under a rule of law, but this was a rule of law that included an established church, a set liturgy and a boundary commission for belief. These things have indeed gone on to shape our nation in countless ways. We should not lose them without a fight; though I for one intend to trust in the armour of the Holy Spirit, which of course looks to the world like nakedness. In other words we cannot expect a secular world not to challenge people of faith, and we will win our argument not by endless appeals to tradition, custom, or even law, but by living and proclaiming the truth of Jesus Christ. It is only when people are converted to Christ that they will see the logic of prayer at public meetings, and everything else that follows from it. In the meantime we can work together with all people of goodwill, and especially people of other faiths, to guard our historic position as best we can.

Read it all.

A number of Dr [John] Sentamu’s follow­ers on Twitter, including some clergy, expressed dismay at his endorsement of The Sun on Sunday. On Monday, the Bishop of Bradford, the Rt Revd Nick Baines, wrote: “All my instincts lead me to take a different view from that of the Archbishop of York on this one.”

Bishop Baines said that he did not question Dr Sentamu’s motive “for writing the article and engaging with the paper in this way”, but said: “I could not endorse the paper myself.” He went on to criticise strongly how News International, which owns The Sun, had handled the investigation into phone-hacking.

The Bishop of Swansea & Brecon, the Rt Revd John Davies, speaking on BBC1’s Big Questions on Sunday morning, said that he was “not impressed” by Dr Sentamu’s article….

Read it all.

Read it all.

The Bishop of Sherborne, the Archdeacon of Dorset and I met with 10 clergy from Dorset who had contacted me following my remarks on same-sex relationships in an interview published in The Times on 3 February, and on the BBC Radio 4 Sunday programme on 5 February.

Bishop Graham and I disagree about the appropriateness of using the word ‘marriage’ for same-sex relationships. He expressed his concerns to me privately and in the meeting. We are, however, committed to working together creatively.

I welcomed the open and robust conversation, which covered the following areas…

Read it all.

Read it all.

Only a “tiny minority” of coun­cillors object to the saying of prayers at local council meetings, the Bishop of Exeter, the Rt Revd Michael Langrish, said on Tuesday.

Bishop Langrish was speaking after the High Court ruled last Friday that prayers should not be on the agenda for council meetings. The National Secular Society (NSS) and the former Bideford town councillor Clive Bone brought judicial-review proceedings against Bideford Town Council, in Devon, after councillors there twice rejected Mr Bone’s request for prayers to be abolished.

Bishop Langrish said: “My per­sonal experience is that it is a tiny minority who object to it [prayers at a council meeting]; at most of the councils I know in Devon it isn’t an issue. . . Leading public prayers in the chamber is an opportunity to articulate very particular issues that the council is dealing with.”

Read it all.

My final point is that we need to see this very much as a moral issue. My contacts in the police force are horrified to see human beings treated by commodities-just being sold. That is a gross moral issue, not just about supply but about demand. There is obviously enormous demand to take advantage of sexual exploitation. What does that say about moral standards and understanding of sexuality in our society? What does it say about a lack of discipline and taking other people seriously as human beings? I ask the Minister that if we withdraw RE from such a central role in schools, who but the great religions is going to provide any moral framework to give people guidance about sexual behaviour in our society?

Read it all.

I conclude from all this ”“ which could of course be spelled out at much more length ”“ that we can only understand early Christianity as a movement that emerges from within first-century Judaism, but that it is so unlike anything else we know in first-century Judaism (and the unlikenesses bear no resemblance to anything in the pagan world) that we are forced to ask what caused these mutations. The only plausible answer is that they were caused by the actual bodily resurrection, into a transformed physicality, of Jesus himself. Put that in place, and everything is explained. Take it away, and everything remains puzzling and confused. Of course, there is a cost. One cannot simply say, ”˜Well, it looks as though Jesus of Nazareth was raised from the dead’ and carry on with business as usual. If it happened, it means that a new world has been born. That, ultimately, is the good news of Easter, the good news which the rationalism of the Enlightenment has tried to screen out and which the church, tragically, has often forgotten as well. But to address this we need to move to the next section of this lecture.

Read it all.

A test case bid to outlaw prayers before local council meetings has been won by the National Secular Society and an atheist councillor, Clive Bone.

They challenged the practice of Bideford town council, Devon, of having religious prayers on meeting agendas.

[On Friday February 11th] Mr Justice Ouseley, sitting in London, ruled: ”The saying of prayers as part of the formal meeting of a council is not lawful under section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972, and there is no statutory power permitting the practice to continue.”

Read it all.

Supporters of women bishops in the Church of England have hailed the latest General Synod vote but warned against further changes to the plan.

A leading campaigner regretted the Archbishop of Canterbury’s remark that “some bits of fine tuning” were needed.

The Church’s ruling body said the House of Bishops could make some amendments to the law before a final vote in July.

Read it all.

The General Synod has asked the House of Bishops not to amend the draft women-bishops Measure “substantially”, after a three-hour debate on Wednesday afternoon.

The Synod backed Canon Peter Spiers in amending the Southwark amendment, so that it implied support for the Bishops to exercise their power to amend the legislation, but not to the extent that it would be likely to necessitate a new reference to the dioceses.

The decision whether any amend­ment is “substantial”, and therefore requires a further diocesan reference, is not, however, in the hands of the House of Bishops, but in those of the so-called “group of six”: the two Archbishops, the two clergy Pro­locutors, and the chair and vice-chair of the House of Laity, taking legal advice.

Read it all.

Read it all.

The Archbishops of Canterbury and York suffered a humiliating defeat yesterday when the Church of England’s governing body rejected moves to create male “co-bishops” to work alongside female bishops in an effort to placate traditionalists.
Women bishops will now be given total authority in their dioceses when they begin to be consecrated from 2014, against the wishes of the Archbishops who had wanted traditionalist male bishops to rule alongside them with equal authority.
The vote increases the chances of further defections by dozens of Anglo-Catholic clergy and laity to the Ordinariate, the branch of the Roman Catholic Church created for defecting Anglicans who wish to retain both their Catholic and Anglican identities in the face of the growing liberalisation of the established Church.

Read it all (subscription required).

The Church of England moved closer to the consecration of women bishops Wednesday when it voted against giving strengthened legal protection to traditionalists who favour an all-male clergy, a decision that could lead more to switch to Rome.

The vote was the last chance for the church’s parliament, or synod, to influence the draft legislation in its long legislative process before it heads to the House of Bishops for consideration in May.

The draft will return to synod in July for a final vote – 20 years after it voted in favour of women priests.

Read it all.

The difficulty many feel is that to leave the phrase ”˜male bishop’ in the draft Measure insufficiently recognises where that particular point comes in the argument people are trying to make. It doesn’t go to the root of it. In other words the theological conviction is not about male bishops as such: it arises from certain other convictions. And one of my questions about the draft Measure is whether anything can be done there, and / or in the Code of Practice, to overcome the resistance that is felt to that phrase, and to do better justice to what it rests upon. If I’m right about the two fundamental principles, that’s not a substantial change in the Measure. But it does of course then raise the question of how, whether in Measure or in Code, we do proper justice to this second point about theological integrity and pastoral continuity and ecclesial integrity; how we do that without over-legislating, over-prescribing in way that creates parallel church identities by default. And that I suppose is what a couple of years ago the Archbishop of York and myself were feeling our way for in the now notorious ”˜archbishops’ amendment’. If you look at some of the background literature that was provided at the time with that amendment, precisely the two principles with which I began were enunciated as the principles on which that amendment was based. Whether we were right or not to cast it in that form, I’m not at all sure. But looking forward to the debate later today, I would quite like Synod””no, I’d very much like Synod””to consider whether leaving a door open for the bishops to revisit some of those questions in the light of where we have got to might not a good idea at this juncture.

Read it all.

A compromise to try to meet objectors’ concerns will be presented by the Manchester Diocesan Synod at a meeting of the Church’s ruling council later.

It would give a greater measure of autonomy to male bishops appointed to oversee traditionalist parishes.

But many supporters of women bishops oppose the plans, saying they would make women second-class bishops.

Read it all.

Read it all.

…the only difference between the current arrangements for “flying” bishops, who are appointed to care for traditionalists, and the new “co-ordinate” bishops proposed by Dr Williams and Dr Sentamu, would be the source of authority.

With delegate bishops, the authority to conduct confirmations and other services would come from the diocesan bishop. With the new “co-ordinate” bishops proposed by the Archbishops, it would come from Synod, giving the traditionalist male equal authority in the diocese with the female diocesan.

But Jamaica-born Ms [Rose] Hudson-Wilkin, the first black woman chaplain to the House of Commons, told The Times that this was unacceptable. “If we are going to have women as bishops then we need to have women bishops. We need to stop moving the goalposts. I am not happy with anything that only begrudgingly makes women bishops.”

Read it all (subscription required).

There is now no doubt that the Church of England will consecrate its first woman bishop within the next couple of years. This will happen without any statutory provision for those who in conscience cannot accept women’s episcopacy. The significant minority of clergy and laity who oppose this innovation will simply be told to like it ”“ or lump it and go elsewhere. Thus tens of thousands of traditional and faithful Anglicans will be unchurched.
This stinking fish has been a long time on the slab. Back in 1992, the church voted to admit women to the priesthood, but this was only agreed upon the intervention of the then Archbishop of York, Dr John Habgood, who insisted that there were “two integrities” within the church: the one that could accept women priests and the other that could not. Room must be made for both. If Dr Habgood’s agreeable compromise had not been accepted then there would not have been a majority in favour of the ordination of women.

The radical innovators, illiberal “liberals,” non-believing secularists and intolerant feminists who together govern the church are determined not to make the same mistake again. They are saying to the opponents of women bishops, “Well, get out then!” ”“ except this injunction is not generally put even as politely as that.

Read it all.

Anglican women clergy are to rally in Westminster later at a march supporting plans to introduce women bishops.

The Church of England’s ruling body, the General Synod, is to discuss legislation on women bishops this week.

It will consider a proposal that women bishops should accept intervention in their dioceses by male alternatives if called in by traditionalist parishes.

Progressive Anglicans fiercely oppose the plans, claiming it would make women second-class bishops.

Read it all.

(Please note that the above headline is mine, the paper itself has “Church split as senior bishop comes out in favour of gay marriage”–KSH).

Bishop Holtam told The Times: “We are living in a different society. If there’s a gay couple in The Archers, if there’s that form of public recognition in popular soaps, we are dealing with something which has got common currency. All of us have friends, families, relatives, neighbours who are, or who know somebody, in same-sex partnerships.”

For a long time he believed that marriage could only be between heterosexual people. But he said: “I’m no longer convinced about that. I think same-sex couples that I know who have formed a partnership have in many respects a relationship which is similar to a marriage and which I now think of as marriage. And of course now you can’t really say that a marriage is defined by the possibility of having children. Contraception created a barrier in that line of argument. Would you say that an infertile couple who were knowingly infertile when they got married, weren’t in a proper marriage? No you wouldn’t.”

Read it all (subscription required). Update – some details are here

It is quite legitimate that this issue is being raised. However, the unity of the Church and our core mission particularly in these sobering and challenging economic times, must remain paramount. I hope the discussion will continue in a prayerful and respectful way, whilst not distracting from the important ministry our churches are carrying out in their communities.

Read it all.

The Rt Rev John Hind, the Bishop of Chichester, has led opposition to ordaining women as bishops but said that it was now certain to happen.

He spoke ahead of a key vote next week by the General Synod, the Church’s governing body, on plans to allow women to lead dioceses, which is currently not allowed.

A leading proponent of women bishops, the Bishop of Oxford, also described their ordination as “inevitable”, saying that it would “happen very soon”.

Read it all.

In the House of Lords this week, the Bishop of Ripon and Leeds, John Packer, led a revolt by senior clergy against the Government’s welfare reforms, arguing that an annual cap on benefits of £26,000 is unfair and un-Christian.

Fine, but if we take Bishop Packer and his fellow bishops at their word over what constitutes a fair income, there are going to have to be some enormous pay rises in the Church of England.

It would be fascinating for example to listen to the bishops explain to their curates ”“ paid about £16,000 a year regardless of the number of dependent children ”“ why they have a duty to support through their taxes a benefit claimant pulling in the pre-tax equivalent of £35,000.

Read it all.

…I disagree profoundly with the Government’s and Lord Carey’s view that our action in the Lords was about prolonging a culture of welfare dependency, or the implication that increased material poverty for some is a price worth paying to alleviate what some have described as the poverty of aspiration….

The Bishops’ amendment simply sought to exclude Child Benefit from the cap, to ensure that some financial support is still provided for each of the estimated 220,000 children who might otherwise be adversely affected.

Exempting Child Benefit will help prevent many children falling into serious poverty and could protect against family break up, or even homelessness.

Read it all.

…these five bishops ”” led by the Bishop of Ripon and Leeds ”” cannot lay claim to the moral high-ground.

The sheer scale of our public debt, which hit £1trillion yesterday, is the greatest moral scandal facing Britain today.

If we can’t get the deficit under control and begin paying back this debt, we will be mortgaging the futures of our children and grandchildren.

In order to do this, we desperately need to reform our welfare system.

Read it all.

Bishops led the House of Lords on Monday evening to vote in favour of an amendment excluding child benefit from the proposed cap on benefits in the Welfare Reform Bill.

Children’s charities welcomed the amendment, proposed by the Bishop of Ripon & Leeds, the Rt Revd John Packer, as a safeguard for those ”” about a quarter of a million children ”” who are ex­pected to bear the impact of the cap.

“The Government must not ignore the fact that the Lords have spoken out to defend the plight of some of the country’s most disad­vantaged children,” the Children’s Society’s policy director, Enver Solomon, said.

Read it all.

Conference participants were enthusiastic about both the speaker’s talks’ content and their tone.

“This conference has been first rate,” said the Rt. Rev. Alden Hathaway. “I’m so encouraged. I was really moved by the Bishop of London yesterday and John McCardell brought it into an American context. All of the speakers have been just fine. The Saturday morning talk, by Justyn Terry, outlining the whole of Christian Education ”“ we’re so enthusiastic about that. He hit all of the levels, from elementary school to college and university formation to theological institutions to continuing education. That’s where it’s at. Mere Anglicanism is really at the heart of it. I’m very, very pleased to be a part of this conference.”

The Rt. Rev. Richard Chartres, Bishop of London, who was one of the presenters, said of the conference, “It’s been a treat to be here in Charleston and I’ve learned a very great deal. One of the things about the Anglican Communion is that you can have all sorts of theories about structures and theological foundations, but if we don’t know one another and if we’re not friends and we don’t spend time actually listening to one another then of course we’re going to have broils and factions. One of the worst things in life I find at the moment is going from place to place and hearing many monologues about the importance of dialogue and I think that this conference has been an example of really deep listening and exchange ”“ genuine dialogue and I appreciate it very much indeed.”

Read it all.

Please go here and click the launch media player link and you will see the sermon at the top of the list.

Listen to it all (mp3).