What is in Kelvin's Head?

The Bishop of St Davids and the Archbishop of Canterbury

19/06/2021

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.

5 responses to “Sermon – 27 July 2008 Leah's Lovely Eyes”

chris

27/07/2008

Father, I confess. I have watched Gok Wan, and there is no health in me. 😉

Reply
Stewart

27/07/2008

Kelvin – You must have a Tardis, or the Cathedral Website is in a different timezone as it infer you preached the sermon on 26 July.

Reply
Kenny

28/07/2008

Can I sook up to YOU Kelvin, by saying that was one of the most powerful sermons I’ve heard for a long time? It put into words, in a way I’ve been unable to, how I feel about the whole Lambeth thing, and the, now (for me), tiresome, issues of sexuality. Yes, let us deal wth these issues, and punt Paul’s bit in Romans to all who feel marginalised. That is the Gospel. Our Bishops need to listen!

But your take on the average Anglican was wonderful. Wot I’ve been trying to say, unsuccessfully, for weeks.

The average mother in Dumbarton’s “worst bits”, is concerned tonight for her teenage child who will, again, come home with needlepoint pupils and another brush with authority under their belt. The house will be damp and nobody in the family will be employed. Addiction, poverty, lack of self-worth, hopelessness, helplessness…

And, here, like everywhere, it doesn’t help us when a single issue is punted by the press as the only thing we’re interested in as Anglicans.

Show the world our best bits? Aye, but sometimes it’s hard to, because the people have already made their decision.

Reply
gail

29/07/2008

Hear, hear, Kenny. An astonishing sermon that astounds again and again on re-hearing or reading.

God’s Truth, simply stated, clearly and succinctly delivered.

I’m all for emphasizing the good bits – so long as we DON’T ‘wear vestments on the beach’ – and that we DO actually deal effectively with the ‘less than good’ bits, so that these can be seen – without embarrassment – when appropriate – and seen as of little importance to the Central Truth.

Dear Leah.

Thank you, Kelvin, for once again bringing new and highly relevant light and insight. I hope Leah’s lovely eyes continue to look over our shoulders, bring Light into dark days and scrutinize doubtful corners……..

Reply
irishpisky

29/07/2008

I have always looked forward to the Sermon time in any Service.

If it proves un-interesting to me, I can spend the time contemplating the great scheme of things, untrammelled by the diversions of life. If, however, it catches my imagination, my spiritual switch is ‘turned-on’ and little flashes of revelation can turn into a flood of light.

Especially, the latest group of sermons has proved to be of the latter kind…all different, with a different approach, theme and presentation, but yet all pointing us in one direction…think outside the’box’.

Because, almost by definition, our Episcopal congregations come for a variety of backgrounds with different viewpoints, so perhaps it is not surprising the those meeting just now have varying opinions.

Perhaps Lambeth may not be notable for what it does, or does not ‘achieve’, but by the fact alone that we all as individuals have been forced to evaluate our view of things.

We know that we will never all agree on everything, but we can sit together happily Sunday by Sunday, and be prepared to have our bigotry and self-centredness questioned.

Perhaps if more Bishops came and sat in St Mary’s congregation they might learn a great lesson…’now we see through a glass darkly, but we are seeing a bit more clearly every day’.

Reply