• The Bishop of St Davids and the Archbishop of Canterbury

    The Rt Rev Dr Joanna Penberthy is the 129th Bishop of St Davids. In tweets that came to light recently, she exhibited an antipathy to members of the Conservative Party which did not sit well with her position.  “Never, never, never trust a Tory” is not what people expect to see a bishop tweeting.

    Once these tweets came to light, there was a considerable brouhaha which seemed to die down when she apologised and deleted her twitter account.

    Now, I happen to think that Bishop Joanna’s tweets were not compatible with her role. I work in a congregation which has political activists in it from time to time of all persuasions and I have had no trouble working and worshipping with them all. I think that she was right to apologise and to make sure that the tweets in question were removed from view.

    One does not need to go very far to realise that I do not have much truck with the policies of the Conservative Party. I have, after all, stood against Tory candidates in several elections. I am fairly obviously of the view that engagement with public political discourse is appropriate (if indeed not sometimes necessary) for those who hold prominent positions within the churches. As it happens, I am now a floating voter and not a member of a political party though I do strongly encourage others who are members of political parties to engage fully with them.

    One of my frustrations about the manner in which Bishop Joanna has expressed herself is that she will now find it very difficult to comment negatively on that which should legitimately be criticised about government policy.

    Policy is the key to the nature of appropriate political discourse I think. For my money, it is generally fair enough to criticise policy and generally not OK to criticise someone’s personality or core identity. 

    So, for example, my view is that it is legitimate to criticise this government’s manufactured hostile environment towards refugees (and now, it seems, all those trying to settle in this country). That policy is cruel. I would go so far as to say it is unchristian. Indeed, I have gone so far as to say such things, from the pulpit, in the newspapers and online.

    I have little doubt that Bishop Joanna would agree with me. However, she is now so far on the back-foot that she will struggle to be able to articulate any coherent opposition to wicked government policies for a very long time.

    Bishop Joanna did get it wrong. However, she did apologise and sought to make amends. Though I think it will be hard for her to do so, I hope that she is back on social media soon and that she will be able to make her points in ways that hit home and which do not lead to her being silenced.

    Now, all this would have been fading away, had not the Archbishop of Canterbury interfered in the matter. It is reported today that he has written to the Secretary of State for Wales expressing the view that he was “truly sorry” for Bishop Joanna’s comments.

    This has now led, very rightly, to outrage being expressed online about the Archbishop of Canterbury interfering in a matter about which he has no jurisdiction. He has no business apologising for what bishops in Wales say in public. 

    Apart from anything else, no archbishop is going to survive the mental gymnastics required if they hold themselves responsible for what every bishop in the Anglican world thinks or says.

    The complaint will now be made by some that people are focussing on Archbishop Justin’s comments and forgetting about the “offence” of Bishop Joanna’s comments.

    And that is, quite rightly, exactly what people are doing.

    Bishop Joanna and the Archbishop of Canterbury have both made statements which are incompatible with their office.

    Bishop Joanna has apologised and those who do have jurisdiction in this matter seem to think that her apology is sincere. Her twitter sins should be forgiven. Archbishop Justin has not apologised for his comments.

    The more he intervenes in the running of other provinces, the more difficult his job becomes.

    The Archbishop of Canterbury hath, as the badge says, no jurisdiction in this Realm of Scotland. The Archbishop of Canterbury hath no jurisdiction in this matter in the Realm of Wales either.

10 responses to “Sermon for 18 October 2009 – The Whirlwind”

  1. fr dougal Avatar
    fr dougal

    This good thanks.

  2. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    Even among habitually good sermons this one shone.

  3. Stewart Avatar

    Great sermon – sorry I missed it, but surprised you were not celebrating the feast of St Luke.

    1. kelvin Avatar

      The feast of St Luke is today, Monday.

  4. Stewart Avatar

    I am really getting puzzled at to the observence of Saints Days. Following a small straw poll, St Mary’s was the only Anglican Church (checking various friends and websites in Scotland and Englandshire) that transfered St Luke from the recognised date of 18 October to the following day (19 October). the SEC church I attended on Sunday morning was observing St Luke.

    The appearance of various Saints Day during the sundays – after Trinity / after Pentecost / in Ordinary Time (select your prefered term) – has in the past seemed to given us a means every few years to consider these Saints in detail. However the wholesale translation away from the Sunday to my mind means we are losing the richness and inspiration that these days has and can provide.

  5. Stewart Avatar

    Wikipedia entry on Luke the Evangelist.

  6. kelvin Avatar

    We celebrated St Luke with a Eucharist in St Mary’s on the day on which the Scottish Episcopal Church commemorates him. This was 19 October this year. Normally it is 18 October.

    There is no confusion in the Calendar and Lectionary of the SEC. Churches with any particular devotion to the Blessed Doctor can celebrate on the Sunday according to local custom. There is no local custom here to warrant that and no whim of the Provost to do so.

  7. Stewart Avatar

    Then it is a loss to the SEC.

    None of the churches I checked were dedicated or had a particluar devotion to St Luke (including the SEC one I attended).

    What was the reason behind moving this and all other saints days away from the relevant sunday in ordinary time when they fell on a sunday?

  8. kelvin Avatar

    Sunday is more important.

    The rules have not changed since we went through this all before, Stewart. If you kept every saints day on the day, you would barely get Sundays at all.

    Neither the SEC nor St Mary’s can be said to be losing out as we kept both the normal Sunday and St Luke’s day.

  9. RevRuth Avatar

    Great sermon, thanks.

    It is good to know that our cathedrals are keeping the great Feasts on the proper days.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • What the Irish Marriage Referendum Means

    The first thing to say is congratulations to all those in Ireland who have campaigned and voted for a change in the law that will allow same-sex couples to be able to enter civil marriage. There’s something incredibly exciting about the fact that the first country to put marriage equality (or at least a step…

  • Why the cake decision is the right decision

    There has been a judgement this morning in an iconic legal case in Northern Ireland. A judge has found that a bakery discriminated against a gay customer over their refusal to bake a cake which had a slogan on it supporting the right of gay people to be married. The decision was the right one.…

  • Scottish Opera – Il Trovatore review – ****

    This review was published at Opera Britannia. Rating: It was a particular joy to see Il trovatore at the Theatre Royal, not only because it is a well directed, well sung sure-fire summer hit for Scottish Opera but also because I was seeing it in the company of someone who had never been to the…