From page 23 of the Archbishops’ Council Budget 2016 [document created June 16th, 2015]
Mission & Public Affairs (MPA) Division

Mission & Public Affairs (MPA) Division
Chair (of MPA Council) Philip Fletcher
Director Revd Dr Malcolm Brown
Staff (FTE) 16.8
2016 Net Expenditure 1,316,370
Funded via:
Archbishops’ Council Restricted Funds 46,010
Vote 2 1,270,360

….
57. The Division delivers public advocacy and apologetics in public life where the Church’s national voice must be articulated. MPA gives direct support the work of dioceses and parishes in mission. MPA staff bring expertise across a wide range of issues including …. marriage, family and sexuality issues..

58. MPA’s priorities for 2016 include:
…Continue to support the process of Facilitated Conversations and begin work on the next steps toward securing “good disagreement”.

Read it all [pdf]

A memo sent round to some members of the Church’s governing synod listed “reasons not to participate” in conversations, which aim to reconcile opposing factions. The note, seen by Christian Today, offers a damning assessment of the secret talks, known as “shared conversations”.

A “dark cloud” also hung over the debate as questions were raised over how the £360,000 conversations were funded. A number of conservatives claimed the conversations were compromised because the liberal wing of the Anglican Church in the USA, which supports gay marriage, had allegedly paid for the talks in part.

Read it all

From the Bishop of Blackburn
It is with reluctance and yet conviction that I sense the need to enter the current debate about human sexuality in a more public way, but from a personal point of view, rather than with a diocesan or Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC) mandate. The recent publication, Journeys in Grace and Truth, written in preparation for General Synod, gives an account of evangelicals who have come to view the Scriptures differently from the traditional understanding. This requires a response from those in the evangelical constituency who hold to the traditional view..

Read it all and there are more links on Anglican Mainstream here

..the Reformation Church of England did not view basic issues of Christian morality as among those issues which could be considered adiaphora. We can see this in Article VII. The second half of this Article states:

Although the law given from God by Moses, as touching ceremonies and rites, do not bind Christian men, nor the civil precepts thereof ought of necessity to be received in any commonwealth; yet, notwithstanding, no Christian man whatsoever is free from the obedience of the commandments which are called moral.

What this statement shows is that in line with the teaching of the New Testament, the 16th century Church of England held that on moral matters (including matters of sexual morality) the teaching of the Old Testament, summarised in the Ten Commandments and the twin command to love God and neighbour was still in force.13 Consequently such matters could not be seen as adiaphora.

Furthermore, even in regard to matters which were adiaphora the Reformation Church of England did not hold that individual Christians were simply free to do whatever they saw fit. This can be seen in Article XXXIV. This reads as follows:

It is not necessary that traditions and ceremonies be in all places one or utterly alike; for at all times they have been diverse, and may be changed according to the diversity of countries, times, and men’s manners, so that nothing be ordained against God’s word.

Whosoever through his private judgement willingly and purposely doth openly break the traditions and ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant to the word of God, and be ordained and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked openly that other may fear to do the like, as he that offendeth against the common order of the Church, and hurteth the authority of the magistrate, and woundeth the conscience of the weak brethren

…..
Conclusion
What we have seen in this paper is that it does make sense to talk about things that are adiaphora.

However, matters on which there are binding commands or prohibitions contained in Scripture (including in the area of sexual morality) do not come under the category of adiaphora.

Furthermore, even with regard to those matters which do come into this category we are not free to do whatever we want. Our exercise of Christian freedom either as individuals or as churches always has to be qualified by an awareness of the implications of our choices, and in particular what impact they will have on the welfare of our neighbours, our obedience to church order and state law and the well-being of the Church as a whole.

Read it all

Following his enthronement as the sixth Archbishop of Kenya on Sunday 3rd July in All Saints’ Cathedral, Nairobi, the Most Rev Jackson Ole Sapit met with the GAFCON Primates who had travelled from as far away as South America to be present for this day of prayer, preaching and colourful celebration.

The Primates welcomed the new Archbishop into their fellowship and he assured them of his desire to build on the work of his predecessor, Archbishop Eliud Wabukala, and continue the Anglican Church of Kenya’s participation in the GAFCON movement.

Among those at the meeting was the Primate of Tanzania, Archbishop Jacob Chimeledya. Preaching from 2 Timothy 4:1-5 earlier in the day, he had encouraged Archbishop Jackson to make preaching the gospel central to his ministry. “Whether it’s a good season or bad one you still have to preach” and he urged that on issues such as corruption and same sex marriage “you cannot remain quiet because being in the top leadership of the church means you have to rebuke and correct whenever necessary.”…

Read it all

Although he praised the “typically Canadian and commendably transparent process” that led General Synod to the marriage canon vote, he said that the conclusions this process led to””that same-sex marriage was theologically possible””“would be difficult to receive” for other parts of the Communion.

In his comments on the vote itself, he expressed concern over how either a “yes” or a “no” would be understood by the wider church.

“However you are led by the spirit in your reflection at this synod on the marriage of gays and lesbians in Canada,” he said, “I pray that your decision may be received in such a way by the provinces of the Communion that it will help, and not hinder, our equally vital agenda to change attitudes that would make people safe.”

Idowu-Fearon, who served as bishop of Kaduna in the Church of Nigeria before becoming secretary general in 2015, said it would be “impossible” to think about the 77-million member Anglican Communion without noting the “historic and ongoing” role Canada has played in it.

Read it all.

O Lord, who seest the multitudes, and art moved with compassion because they are an-hungered: Inspire thy Church with thy love and pity to gather unto thee the famished souls of men, that they may be satisfied with the living Bread; and as thou carest for the bodies as well as for the souls of men, move us and all thy servants with like mercy; that the needy may be fed and clothed, and that none may be homeless or destitute; for the glory of thy holy name.

Be strong and of good courage; for you shall cause this people to inherit the land which I swore to their fathers to give them. Only be strong and very courageous, being careful to do according to all the law which Moses my servant commanded you; turn not from it to the right hand or to the left, that you may have good success wherever you go. This book of the law shall not depart out of your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it; for then you shall make your way prosperous, and then you shall have good success.

–Joshua 1:6-8

The nexus between Big Government, Big Money, Big Influence, and Big Media is sometimes empowered by familial journalistic continuity (e.g., John Dickerson, son of Nancy Dickerson) or a second generation of fashion/glitz and media (Gloria Vanderbilt and Anderson Cooper), but again is increasingly expressed in the corridor “power couple,” the sorts who receive sycophantic adulation in New York and Washington monthly magazines. The Andrea Mitchell/Alan Greenspan power marriage was hailed as a threefer of media, government, and money. What was so strange, however, was just how often wrong were Mitchell in her amateurishly politicized rants and Greenspan in his cryptic Delphic prophecies ”” and always in areas of their supposedly greatest expertise.

Take also the Obama Cabinet. When we wonder how Susan Rice could go on television on five occasions in a single day to deceive about Benghazi; or John Kerry ”” in the middle of a war whose results Obama would come to call a “stable” and “self-reliant” democratic Iraq ”” could warn American youth that the punishment for poor school performance was “to get stuck in Iraq”; or Jay Carney (now senior vice president of global corporate affairs at Amazon) and Josh Earnest could both repeatedly mislead the country on Benghazi, the reason may be not just that they felt their influence, status, and privilege meant they were rarely responsible for the real-world consequences of their own rhetoric, but that they had forgotten entirely the nature of middle-class America, or never really knew it at all.
I get the impression that members of the D.C. elite do not wait in line with a sick kid in the emergency room on a Saturday night, when the blood flows and the supporters of rival gangs have to be separated in the waiting room; or that they find dirty diapers, car seats, and dead dogs tossed on their lawns, or wait two hours at the DMV, or are told that their journalistic assignment was outsourced to India, or read public-school teachers’ comments on their kids’ papers that were ungrammatical and misspelled to the point of being incomprehensible. The elite seems to be ignorant that, about 1975, Bedford Falls flyover country started to become Pottersville.

In forming perceptions about Benghazi, the Iran deal, globalization, or illegal immigration, it is sometimes hard to know who is making policy and who is reporting and analyzing such formulations ”” or whether they are one and the same. National Security Advisor Susan Rice is married to former ABC television producer Ian Cameron. Ben Rhodes, who drew up the talking-points deceptions about Benghazi and seemed to boast of deceiving the public about the Iran deal, is the brother of CBS News president David Rhodes. Will 60 Minutes do one of its signature hit pieces on Ben Rhodes?

Secretary of State John Kerry ”” who famously docks his yacht in Rhode Island in order to avoid paying Massachusetts taxes on it ”” is married to Teresa Heinz, the billionaire widow of the late senator and catsup heir John Heinz. Former Obama press secretary Jay Carney married Claire Shipman, senior national correspondent for ABC’s Good Morning America; his successor, Josh Earnest, married Natalie Wyeth, a veteran of the Treasury Department. Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s “body woman,” is married to creepy sexter Anthony Weiner; perhaps she was mesmerized by his stellar political career, his feminist credentials, and his tolerant approach to deviancy? And on and on it goes.

These Christiane Amanpour/Jamie Rosen or Samantha Power/Cass Sunstein types of connections could be explored to the nth degree, especially their moth-to-the-flame progressive fixations with maximizing privilege, power, and class. But my purpose is not to suggest some conspiratorial cabal of D.C. and New York insiders, only to note that an increasing number of government and media elites are so entangled with each other, leveraging lucrative careers in politics, finance, and the media, and doubling their influence through marriage, that they have scant knowledge of and less concern for the clingers who live well beyond their coastal-corridor moats. And so when reality proves their preconceptions wrong ”” from Benghazi to Brexit ”” they have only outrage and disdain to fall back on.

Read it all.

I will take comments on this submitted by email only to KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

Read it all.

he largest single provider of schools and academies in England has today launched a bold and ambitious vision for education at General Synod. The Church of England educates 1 million pupils in 4700 schools and has plans to open another 125 schools in the next five years. Speaking at Synod, the lead Bishop for education, Stephen Conway, Bishop of Ely, said the vision will equip the Church in the current wider education framework: ‘With the opportunity to shape and enhance our provision and to influence the debate about what education is for; to open new schools and develop existing schools; and to provide radically new approaches to how we function as a movement for education and train teachers and leaders to share that vision.’

The Vision was developed by a theological reference group, chaired by Professor David Ford, Regius Professor of Divinity Emeritus at Cambridge University following widespread consultation.

The Church of England Vision for Education embraces the spiritual, physical, intellectual, emotional, moral and social development of children and young people. It offers a vision of human flourishing for all, one that embraces excellence and academic rigour, but sets them in a wider framework. This is worked out theologically and educationally through four basic elements which permeate the vision: wisdom, hope, community and dignity.

Read it all and follow the links for more.