A very Inappropriate candidate

Image via Wikipedia

My Dear Bishop

I have finished the series of interviews regarding Jason Christopher and his stated desire to be ordained.  I consider him to be a very inappropriate candidate and do not believe that he has a ‘calling’ to priestly ministry.

I have noted in detail, elsewhere, my concerns about Jason but I will summarise the substantial evidence for my prime concern here.

Firstly it is alarming that most of his friends appear to be male and that he is unmarried.  Jason further confided in me that he had visited prostitutes on many occasions but that he had never had sexual relations with any one of them.  This is a worry.

Jason also recounted a very perturbing act of lewdness.  He admitted that he had been kissed by a man, and that this was openly in a public place in full view of others.  It is not the conduct becoming of a person seeking Holy Orders and he also went on to reveal that he and the man in question fell out soon after the kiss.  This is typical of men who are sexually attracted to other men; they have regular spats and are continually fighting amongst themselves and falling out.

I understand further, from a letter that was passed to me anonymously that another man claimed that Jason ‘loved him’ and this kind of thing is deeply worrying.  If this sort of thing got into the press then the scandal would be most damaging.  It is something we should not countenance and it is not something we would have control over.

There are several other concerns about Jason that preclude him from suitability for ordination, not least his relationship with authority and tendency to be subversive.  He is far too outspoken and fails to realise the difficulties facing the Anglican Communion today, he would never achieve high office and would be a thorn in the side of us all were he ever to do so.

As far as his education is concerned, I note that he has not attended the best schools and failed to achieve a place at either university.

You will, by now, understand why I cannot recommend Mr Christopher as a suitable candidate for ordination.

On a personal note, may I express my heartfelt concern on hearing about your separation from Felicity?  It is a difficult time for you both, I realise, but I also know that Adam will continue to be a real support to you through this time.  I am delighted that he has been able to take time out of his busy schedule to be with you at the Palace and offer you his support.

Yours sincerely

Rev’d  P Giddings

Whose Church is it anyway?

Image by Getty Images via @daylife

The world of the Church of England ‘Democracy’ is somewhat defective in that it is a rather closed environment.  It is closed for a variety of reasons and here are a few I can think of from my observations.

Firstly it is not covered very well by much of the Press.  Ordinary people, not least ordinary worshippers do not hear what goes on.  The dedicated, and not widely read, publications that do carry General Synod reports are dry and staid in their reporting and thereby not likely to be accessed by most people.  Most of the honest and up to the minute reporting goes on online and to a slowly growing audience, and I’m not talking about the C of E website. Do try THINKING ANGLICANS, they are very good.

Secondly, the more local democracy (Diocesan Synods) are not well run, with matters being badly chaired, usually by management.  Real opposition to the accepted view is not given much of a voice, if any.  In the case of the Anglican Covenant the matter seems to be being presented to many diocese as a matter for endorsement rather than debate!

Thirdly, there is a long accepted acquiescence towards Clergy and particularly senior clergy who are most often given the status of ‘sainthood’ in the minds of the worshippers.  It is unfortunate that clergy are viewed in this way as it provides a predisposition to believe what they say and at the very least to give them the benefit of the doubt.  Therefore reason may fail in a debate when Archbishops and others demand loyalty.

Democracy demands openness and an active press.  So much in the Church of England relies on explicit and implicit secrecy.  Opposition is too often painted as disloyalty to clergy and good reporting is not widely read by the constituents.  Synod allows this untidy and unsatisfactory position to continue on the whole, but there are a growing number of subversives who are muttering discontent in the restaurants of London and the corridors of York University (summertime).

Mr C

The Three Bishops

Image by Eustaquio Santimano via FlickrI have just had a small spat (my first) on twitter following my comment that the three Anglican Bishops who are submitting to re-ordination to the Roman Priesthood are denying their existing Priesthood, conferred on them by Catholic Bishops in the Anglican Communion.  I have apparently forgotten to read what they have said about that complex issue before making such a sweeping statement.

It is a difficult position for for me as I am very much aware of the issues involved and have lived with the tensions for year now.  I guess I am angry because for those who have been ordained to the priesthood in the Church of England, and who adhere to Catholic teachings, the notion of being re-ordained is just not an option, well not in my opinion anyhow.

For years some of us have longed for reunification of some sort with the Roman Church but we would never compromise on Priestly orders as the Roman's demanded, and we were very clear that our clergy would never submit to re-ordination.  This was, at one time, an absolute position almost a badge of honour and proof positive that you were a true Anglican Catholic.  I don't think the arguments have changed!

What has changed is the utter lack of tolerance shown by sections of the Anglican Communion to the Catholic section, those who did not accept the ordination of women to the Priesthood.  We failed to accommodate them and they have been boxed into a terrible corner, and finally have had to submit to Rome!

In fact both sides have been horrid and there's nothing for any side to crow about, many of us are guilty of intolerance in this sordid matter.

My prayers are with these men as they submit to Rome, a church I love and pray for, but a church I am, sadly, not part of.  I understand their need to argue their position and convince themselves and others that there is no fudge, or slight of hand, but I cannot agree.  We must allow them their brush with the reality of the situation they have been put in.  I must remain staunchly Anglican, and Catholic.

Mr C