Showing posts with label Act of Synod. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Act of Synod. Show all posts

Sunday, 8 August 2010

The Heart of the Matter


St Ambrose Bournemouth is a handsome church on the West Cliff, built at the turn of the 19th/20th Century to bring catholic worship to that part of the rapidly growing resort. Four years ago there was a devastating fire; and around that time the incumbent retired. Since then the parish has struggled on with the help of retired clergy. Now at last it has something to look forward to; the Church Council voted to seek extended pastoral care with a unanimous vote in June. Now they await the Bishop of Winchester's visit (promised sometime this autumn) when he will tell them what provision he will make for them, and they will be able to comment on his proposals.



In reality, this should mean the care of the Provincial Episcopal Visitor, the Bishop of Richborough, for neither of the new appointments to Basingstoke or Southampton fulfils the criteria set out in the Act of Synod. These two new bishops are both content, it seems, with women's ordination. The act of synod requires that the bishop caring for "C" parishes should himslef be opposed to women's ordination. Of course, if the proposals by the two Archbishops had been accepted during the July Synod, that would not have mattered. Basingstoke or Southampton could have been given the task of caring for "Third Resolutioon" parishes even if they were the most enthusiastic proponents of women bishops; all the Archbishops' Amendments would have offered was a male bishop, to be nominated by the bishop of the diocese, and no chance for a parish to demur.

This evening I was invited to pontificate and preach at solemn evensong. All the church plate was on display (including a very handsome monstrance - maybe next time I can be asked to use it!) and I absolved and blessed and swung incense during the Magnificat. St Ambrose has, from it vestments and fittings, clearly had its high church moments. At present it would call itself "prayer book catholic". I suggested that if they wanted to be genuinely prayer book there was a better chance of achieving that in the Ordinariate than in the rapidly disolving Church of England. It was my third sermon for the day; I had preached at 8o'clock in Lymington (My house is the house of prayer") , at 10 o'clock at St Francis Bournemouth ("The Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect") - the third one you can see for yourself if you care to look at the Anglo Catholic blog - where I shall also try to put a few more St Ambrose pictures. They have made one brave decision, to seek extended espicopal oversight. Will they be ready, when the time comes, to take the much bolder decision, to join the Ordinariate? If not, it may be they will have just the catholic decor, without the heart of the matter.

Friday, 25 June 2010

a Sacred Synod

I am grateful to the I Timoth 4 blog for this piece, which I have reproduced simply because it needs to be as widely known as possible. I have already responded to +John Plymouth; if it applies to you, don't leave it, respond asap.


"Catholic-Minded clergy in the Southern Province called to a Sacred Synod in London
September 24th 2010
The Bishops of Plymouth, Horsham and Richborough, writing on behalf of the Bishops of Chichester, Burnley, Ebbsfleet, and Fulham, and Bishops Lindsay Urwin, Michael Nazir-Ali and Robert Ladds, have invited Catholic-minded Anglican clergy of the Southern Province of the CofE to a Sacred Synod, to be held at the Emmanuel Centre, 9–23 Marsham Street, Westminster, London SW1P 3DW on September 24th between 11.00am and 3.00pm.
Their invitation is principally to those who have expressed severe reservations about the innovation of women bishops and who signed an open letter to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York on that subject some two years ago, but is also open to those who are now presented with questions which cause them to hesitate, pause and reflect on the difficulties which face the CofE and the wider Anglican family, and about the future direction of the CofE.
Clerical members of Forward in Faith are welcome, as are clergy who are not members of that organization, as an opportunity for them to express their anxiety and opinion and to take counsel with others in similar situations.
All those who intend to be present should register their interest by sending an email to bishop.of.plymouth@exeter.anglican.org. This is to help with planning. Packed lunches should be brought, or local catering outlets used during the break for lunch. Attendees are asked to bring £5.00 to help defray the costs of the event.
(A similar event is to take place in the Northern Province at Belle Isle in Leeds on Thursday 23rd September 2010, details to be confirmed.)"

For myself, I hope as many as possible who are accepting the Holy Father's Offer will be present.
+ Edwin

Sunday, 20 June 2010

Sarum S Martin


Fr Whyte & friends
First Sunday off in many weeks, so we celebrated Fathers' Day (Fathering Sunday?) by worshipping in a favourite church, St Martin's, Salisbury. It chanced to be the 57th Wedding Anniversary of Fr Duncan Whyte, who assists there, and also his wife's birthday, so we joined in the merriment.



A very pretty side altar



Fr Keith Robinson, the Rector, had a brief PCC meeting in the chancel after Mass, so you see him [in the first picture at the top of the page] with the eagle competing on mike. The church spire was intended as a trial run for the much taller spire on the neighbouring Cathedral. That is from the 14th Century. Three hundred years ago it was surveyed by Christopher Wren, and found to be 13ft off centre. It still is. Incredible that it stands, built as it is on boggy ground with scarcely any foundations. The Spire was an afterthought; there was meant to be just a central tower.

We met several old friends, in particular a priest's wife visiting from Cornwall. We'd hoped to escape horror stories by going to St Martin's but she told us of her experience in Truro Cathedral. They live near Bodmin, but there is no longer any catholic presence in any Anglican church nearby. So they took themselves to the Cathedral. A woman priest appeared, vested for mass, so they quietly left. Our friend then wrote to the Dean asking whether he might not announce who was to be the celebrant. He duly consulted with the Chapter, and said, "No". So much for the honoured place which traditionalists are meant to have in the Church of England, when their own cathedral is determined to make life intolerable. Yet we are being told once more that a 'Statutory Code of Practice' will look after us. It will not. Nothing short of bishops with jurisdiction will do; and that we shall not be given, no matter how Synod wriggles at its meeting next month. Oh, hurry on the Ordinariate!





The day was completed with lunch at a riverside hotel overlooking the Cathedral, and another visit to the gardens at Mottisfont on the way home.

Friday, 7 May 2010

A Code of Practice Will Not Do

As was widely predicted, the Church of England has chosen the day after a General Election to bury its bad news. Tomorrow the various reports concerning women in the Episcopate are to be published.* Meanwhile we have to make do with Ruth Gledhill's blog, where she leaks as follows:

"As the Bishop of Manchester indicated to General Synod in February 2010, the draft legislation continues to provide special arrangements for those with conscientious difficulties by way of delegation from the diocesan bishop under a statutory Code of Practice.
The legislation has been amended in a number of detailed respects.
Provision for statutory declarations by bishops unable to take part in the consecration of women as bishops or their ordination as priests has been removed as has an obligation on the Archbishops to nominate particular suffragan sees to be occupied by those who do not consecrate or ordain women.
Added to the Measure are new provisions requiring each diocesan bishop to draw up a scheme in his or her diocese that takes account of the national Code of Practice and provides local arrangements for the performance of certain episcopal functions in relation to parishes with conscientious difficulties.
A further new provision allows such parishes to request, when there is a vacancy, that only a male incumbent or priest-in-charge be appointed. It is expected that much of the July group of sessions of the General Synod in York (9-13 July) will be devoted to debating the Revision Committee’s report and conducting the Revision Stage of the legislation. "


There will, alas, be some priests and parishes who are taken in by this. 'Oh, we shall still be able to have a male priest here, so that's all right!..' No, it is not. First, note that all bishops must participate in the consecration of women bishops. No conscience clause for them. And when a man is consecrated there will doubtless be women bishops joining in the consecration even before we have our first women Archbishop. And do you suppose any priest opposed to women's ordination could be instituted? And how could he swear allegiance to the Bishop of X and her successors...?
"But we will still have the PEVs to protect us!" Oh no you won't. The Archbishops will not have to retain the sees of Ebbsfleet, Richborough or Beverley for those opposed; and so any safeguard there is removed. How could a new PEV accept office in the first place, though? He would have to accept that he was part of a college of bishops which included women whom be believes are not bishops; but he would not be allowed to say that, and women bishops would participate in his consecration. Since at least three of those functioning as Episcopal Visitors are committed to joining the Ordinariate, there would just be the PEV of the Northern Province hanging on until forced to retire by reason of age just four years from now. This is not the provision we asked for, "for our children and grandchildren".
So what shreds of a fig-leaf are left? Any special arrangements are by way of delegation from the diocesan bishop. A woman bishop would have to draw up a code of practice in her diocese which would "take account of a National Code of Practice". As a PEV until nine years ago I had the 'protection' of something much stronger than a code of practice. Yet even those legal provisions of the Act of Synod were largely ignored by many bishops. Now at least two of the women straining at the leash to be consecrated have said that when they are bishops they will do all they can to ensure any such code would be a dead letter. And even if they do make provision for those benighted parishes which do not accept their ministry, how will it be achieved? Will they ask a neighbouring male suffragan bishop, who himself fully approves of women bishops and joins in their consecrations, to take confirmations in that parish? What is that but pure misogyny.

The fact is, we are not (as is falsely alleged) 'opposed to women'. Many of those most firmly against women in the episcopate are themselves women. What we assert is our belief that women may not and should not be bishops in the Church of God. It would be very much easier for us if we could accept them; but, as Archbishop Rowan has recognised, we cannot, and this is a matter of conscience.

What is to be done, then? Far better end the pretence, scrap the fig leaf, go ahead with consecrating women and tell us to go. After all, the fig leaf is not for us; we have told you, A Code of Practice Will Not Do. Its only purpose is to try to hide your own embarrassment.

And, dear Synod, while you are about it, remember that you are breaking all the promises you so solemnly gave us when women were first ordained. You are ignoring the conclusions of the Eames Commission, that the Anglican Communion by itself could not resolve the question of whether women might be ordained. You are setting aside the decisions of the last two Lambeth Conferences, that those opposed to women's ordination have an opinion of equal value to the opposite opinion. And as a new Parliament is elected, you seem to forget that the Ecclesiastical Committee of Parliament required you to make proper financial provision for those who were being driven out of their livings by a decision they could not, in conscience, accept. Until that was promised, the Measure could not pass into law.
Go ahead, but don't pretend your Codes of Practice hold any interest for us. It is only you who need them, to cover your naked ambition in striving for your own will and intention. Forget the Codes; let us part honestly, as fellow Christians. Don't patronise (or even matronise) us any longer.




*The reports are now published, Sat 8th, and dismal reading they make. You will find a link to them at Fr Ivan Aquilina's blog (listed alongside this posting: St John's Sevenoaks)