The Assistant Bishop of London has issued the following statement regarding the service that took place at St Bartholomew the Great on 31 May.
Dear Colleagues,
I am contacting you all on Bishop Richard’s behalf since, as you know, he is currently away on holiday.
Earlier this year, the Bishop wrote to you regarding a service held at St Bartholomew the Great on May 31st, which had generated considerable publicity and consternation.
Since this time, under the Bishop’s instructions, the Archdeacon of London has carried out an investigation into the matter, alongside the Chancellor of the Diocese. This has involved a series of frank discussions with the Rector, Revd Dr Martin Dudley.
As a consequence, the Rector has made expressly clear his regret over what happened at St Bartholomew the Great and accepted the service should not have taken place. Bishop Richard has considered the matter and has decided to accept the Rector’s apology in full. The matter is therefore now closed.
To avoid any uncertainty over what has been said, I have enclosed below, with the Rector’s permission, his statement of apology to the Bishop:
“I can now appreciate that the service held at St Bartholomew the Great on 31 May 2008 was inconsistent with the terms of the Pastoral Statement from the House of Bishops issued in 2005. Whilst the precise status of this pastoral document within the Church of England generally and the Diocese of London in particular may be a matter of differing interpretations, I ought to have afforded it far greater weight. I regret the embarrassment caused to you by this event and by its subsequent portrayal in the media. I now recognise that I should not have responded positively to the request for this service, even though it was made by another incumbent of your Diocese, who is a colleague, neighbour and friend of us both nor should I have adopted uncritically the Order of Service prepared by him and his partner. I had not appreciated that the event would have been attended by so many nor that it would have attracted the publicity and notoriety which it did.
“I share your abhorrence of homophobia in all its forms. I am profoundly uneasy with much of the content of the House of Bishops’ Pastoral Statement which anecdotal evidence suggests is being widely, though discretely, disregarded in this Diocese and elsewhere. Nonetheless, I am willing to abide by its content in the future, until such time as it is rescinded or amended, and I undertake not to provide any form of blessing for same sex couples registering civil partnerships.”
As I say, following the Rector’s full and frank apology, the Bishop considers the matter now closed.
With best wishes and prayers
Pete Broadbent
Assistant Bishop of London
The agenda comes out loud and clear between the two of them. “Sorry I got caught (for now), but we all agree that the Church needs to come around to our way of thinking. Any one who disagrees, well we can use the “H†word to discredit and marginalize them. For now, we will put this matter to rest.
Cole,
Sorry but you are wrong in this Bp. Richard has made his views known, and all the diocesan clergy have now been warned. There will be no flouting of the statement while it is in force. The chance of it being rescinded is growing less and less. After all, it is the evangelical and charismatic parishes in the diocese which are growing, not the liberal or (and forgive me for this) anglo catholic.
regards,
Jon
Jon: And I’m sorry that I’m not just commenting on things happening on my own side of the pond. But I read the letter on this side, and it did not strike me as repentant. That is how it came across to me when the underlying issue was redirected at the end.
The bishop could hardly have let him off with a softer bit of discipline! It has much more of the flavor of a winking “Naughty, Naughty!” than the more robust rebuke it deserved. And, to do this through another?
I’m sure this all communicates clearer to the English, who are admirably careful of reputation and measured public statements.
Nevetheless….more evidence of why Gafcon will proceed while the CofE dithers!
This rebuke is liberal pablum and quite meaningless. It reminds me of the blog entry on the British just approving genetic manipulation of a perfectly shameful and unprincipled sort. What IS the matter with the British? What has happened to the traditional self-restraint and self discipline? Has the whole society gone bizarrely TECnological? Larry