Forward in Faith welcomes Sir William Fittall’s judicious report on Wakefield Cathedral.
We welcome particularly the Independent Reviewer’s ruling that ‘Even where the identity of the celebrant at a service is not routinely published in advance it should not be regarded as confidential information. It should, therefore, be supplied with a good grace to anyone who asks for it in advance so that they can make an informed choice over whether to attend a particular service in the light of their theological conviction in relation to gender and ministry.’
We are grateful for the sympathy and understanding that Sir William has shown to a faithful lay member of the Cathedral’s congregation in the situation in which he has been placed by a change of policy the ‘foreseeable effect’ of which, Sir William points out, ‘is precisely to increase the greater separation that the Dean says he wishes to avoid’.
As Sir William says, ‘The Church of England… has committed itself to enabling the minority to flourish within its life and structures. Denying brothers and sisters in the Body of Christ information which is not intrinsically confidential and which they need in order to act consistently with their theological conviction tends to undermine that commitment.’
A generous and Christ-like approach would be to go the extra mile and make such information available without waiting to be asked. That would help to make Wakefield Cathedral a truly inclusive church.
† TONY WAKEFIELD
The Rt Revd Tony Robinson
Chairman Lay Vice-Chairman
LINDSAY NEWCOMBE
Dr Lindsay Newcombe
Lay Vice-Chairman
IAN McCORMACK
The Revd Ian McCormack
Clerical Vice-Chairman
I wonder how long it will be before the cathedral deans no longer allow the bishops to sign their names with the name of the see (“+Tony Wakefield” or “+Justin Cantaur”) but reserve that for the dean’s own signature.
I think ‘Tony Robinson’ is a typo. (Laughing here)
I’m surprised they didn’t also ask for a list of gay male celebrants so they would know who to invite to their parties.
What the issue guys? Just publish that the Very Reverends Mr & Mrs or Ms & Ms or Mr & Mr Bloks are the co-celebrants of the services. Why bother with independent reviewers? Don’t waste anybody’s time. Just take it as is gigs: +++Justin
TEC’s progressive blog under its “Lead” “Saturday roundup” (supposedly news but stilted beyond belief, sometimes) section is covering this story under 2 headlines-
“And a reminder that bigots are everywhere” links to a news story about the report from William Fittall. And
“plus Forward in Faith UK jumps on the hate bandwagon” links to the FiF statement.
So, any illusions that Anglo Catholics (or “traditionalist” Evangelicals) might have that they remain a valued part of TEC should be dispelled. For that matter, any illusions that TEC bishops discipline their clergy for publishing libelous headlines about bishops and clergy and laity of the Church of England should also be dispelled.
It matters little, in the long run, as the response from the Dean’s office appears to be along the lines of “William Fittall is not the boss of me”.
This whole story is beginning to take on an ironic twist. Reading the various progressive blogs on this, it appears that an alliance is forming between feminized male clergy in the UK and what appear to be mostly lay women from the UK and US that, if successful, will result in driving hundreds of gay male Anglo Catholic clergy out of the CoE. They certainly did not expect the progressives and liberals to label them as bigots, misogynists and haters, and recommend they all be defrocked. But that is essentially what is happening.
Are you able to share some sources or more information about this? Is this typical dissatisfaction from the comprehensively illiberal liberal wing of the CofE, or are there indications that the reaction may be effectively pushing towards a purge?
I am just responding to what is being written on a number of progressive TEC and CoE blogs out there- and just those I happen to have read. So, I do not have secret sources. However, it seems to be no secret that quite a number of the Anglo Catholic clergy in the UK are gay. And I can say, with some confidence, that there are lots of gay male clergy who oppose WO.
And here I am using Anglo Catholic in the FiF sense. With the Wakefield situation now in the news, the actual hatred of the progressives towards Anglo Catholicism is fairly evident. Something noted (not just by me) is that the “gloves are coming off” in a number of areas- that is, the progressive leadership in many parts of the church are no longer playing the “can’t we all just live together” meme. The disciplinary process against +Bill Love in Albany (by TEC), the recent intolerance for Anglo Catholics (in the Sheffield bishop controversy and now Wakefield Cathedral dust up) by the very people who proposed the “five principles”, and the abusive and racist language hurled by progressives against African delegates at the Methodist General Conference all bear witness.
Are these gay male Anglo Catholic clergy actively gay, that is, sexually active with other men, or are they same-sex attracted but celibate?
Well, one can’t generalize about all of them, of course, but it is widely known (partly thanks to Anglican Unscripted) that there is a sexually-active gay cabal within FIF in the UK.
I’m sure that there are celibate gay Anglo-Catholic clergy, as well.
This is a different organization from FIF in North America and it should not be tarred with the same brush at all.
Thanks, Dr. Professional. I have known some of the FIF/North America people, and this was not my impression of them. This explains some of the very negative comments from UK evangelicals re: Anglo Catholics, which I have seen here and there.
FIFNA is much different from FIF/England.
But, you did raise a good point Katherine. There should only be two kinds of clergy- those who are married (to someone of the opposite biological sex) and celibate. People having sexual relations outside of marriage have no business being clergy, and should not be ordained, or if they take up such relationships after ordination, should be removed from ministry.
That said, teaching that gay marriage is a form of Christian marriage, or that the sex focused post modern culture is “holy” should also be a cause for discipline within the church.
Yes to all of these.
I know two outstanding priests linked to FiF UK and they are married with children. They lament the the general confusion within their own network as well as the broader church.
Add me to the list of those who are FiF, married with children, and full of lament at those in FiF and the rest of the CofE whose lifestyles are not only ungodly, but label us all with disrepute by their actions
Fr K I wonder if you know my friends… If you’re interested follow my discus account through to my blog where you’ll find my email address.