• Online reading

    Here’s some on-line reading.

    The Doctrine Committee of the Scottish Episcopal Church published an essay earlier this year on Marriage and Human Intimacy. This is available now online for the first time along with the other previous essays which they have written.

    There was a mini-brouhaha on twitter when one or two people actually read it this afternoon and started to recount the ways in which it is offensive. The bit about scientific evidence for gay people reacting to sweat differently to straight people seems to be the bit that has caused most offence. Silliest is perhaps: “Gay men tend to weigh less than heterosexual men and
    to have shorter limbs and hands.”

    By far the most offensive thing about it from my point of view is that on being asked at General Synod whether any gay people had been engaged, consulted or included in the process, the convener of the group answered in the negative.

    Do I need to spell it out? If we were doing a piece of work about women but all the writers were men…..if we were doing something about disability and no-one bothered to speak to anyone in a wheelchair…..

    Etc.

    There will be plenty more to say about this later, but for now read it. It is designed to provoke debate and is an invitation to respond.

    The essay is available here.

    Rather more positively we have a good article in the White Rose, the magazine of Old St Paul’s church in Edinburgh.

    Towards the end of a long article, well worth reading, Ian Paton, their Rector says:

    As far as I can see, therefore, there is no obvious reason why such Godgiven humanity should not be affirmed in same-sex relationships as well as in heterosexual ones. No relationships are perfect, whatever the sexual orientation of the persons involved, but they all contain the potential to reveal that God-given humanity.

    Despite the prejudices and ignorance of many people, which I have shared on the past, gay and lesbian people themselves have developed ways of finding, establishing and celebrating life-long relationships of mutual commitment and joy. For myself, I
    can see no reason, in the Bible or in Tradition, for preventing those relationships from being equally
    acknowledged and affirmed, with those of heterosexual couples, as marriages blessed by God, signs and sacraments of God’s committed and joyful love for the world.

    When he is not busy being the Rector of Old St Paul’s, Fr Ian also happens to convene the Liturgy Committee in our church.

    You can find that here.

5 responses to “The Primus’s Radio Interview about the Columba Declaration”

  1. Benj Avatar
    Benj

    I’m not sure Chillingworth gave a clear answer to Beattie’s question of what is wrong with the declaration beyond its discourtesy and rudeness. What does he mean when he says it is putting at risk the leadership of Christian faith communities at a critical moment in the ‘story of Scotland’?

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      I can’t speak for Bishop David but my view is that this debacle (the discourtesy and rudeness and the rest) has had a serious knock on effect on the ecumenical life of Scotland. To put it bluntly, trusts and friendships that have been built up over years have been very sorely tested. I think that this risks poisoning ecumenical life in Scotland for a generation and I’d say that does seriously compromise the way in which church communities and leaders will be able to speak to Scotland.

  2. Richard Avatar
    Richard

    It also speaks volumes for the contempt with which the Church of Englandshire holds for the Scottish Episcopal Church.

    You struggle to see the shining truth through his words because his words lack honesty and integrity. Not that anyone in Englandshire really cares- most probably haven’t even heard of the Scottish Episcopal Church and if they have, it will be as an unknown backwater entity. To sweep aside the Scottish Episcopal Church must have taken breathtaking arrogance.

  3. Iain McLarty Avatar
    Iain McLarty

    I can totally understand the SEC concern about the CofE barging into territory that isn’t theirs. However, there are perhaps a few things to bear in mind about why a relationship between the CofS and CofE is important where that isn’t really relevant.

    The first is that the CofS has a presence in England. Having spent a few years in a CofE congregation in Denmark I witnessed first hand how important the Porvoo agreement was in that context for enabling local worship and mission and similarly it could be hugely beneficial for the CofS congregations in England to be able to develop more formal relationships with their local Anglican partners.

    Secondly, there are a number of areas where the CofS and CofE are already working together and developing closer relationship such as on training and fresh expressions. These are areas where the relationships have developed naturally due to the two churches dealing with similar areas of concern and where there should again be no encroaching on SEC ground.

    Thirdly, the CofS and CofE work closely together in ecumenical circles through both CTBI and the WCC where both are significant players. It does seem strange that these two churches don’t recognise each other when their place in the wider ecumenical scene is so closely linked. That is not to deny the SEC’s ecumenical importance.

    Obviously no one is denying that the way this became public has been badly handled but I struggle to see what more can be down than the very sincere apologies and frank criticisms of what happened which have been offered. In terms of what real issues there are, I have yet to see anyone pin down specific parts of the Columba agreement which are concerning to the SEC, with all the comments either much more vague or else being fears about issues (such as interchangeability of ministry) which are not actually part of the agreement. In my experience (through ACTS, WCC etc.) the relationship between the CofS and SEC is one of the strongest ecumenical relationships and it would be very sad if this was jeopardised because of miscommunication rather than substance.

  4. Jeremy Bates Avatar
    Jeremy Bates

    It’s not just Scotland. A lot of people are struggling to see truth in the words of the Archbishop of Canterbury these days.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Satire Round Up

    Time for a round up of church satire o­nline.The Frankly Unfriendly Catholics are well represented o­n the net with their page – linked hereThe Most Holy Church of Rockall – Autocephalous and Autocratic since AD 50 has a splendid picture o­n its website – linked here. They also have an up to date news service…

  • Phew

    Phew – well, that is Edinburgh sorted, thank goodness. I was doing a repeat of the workshop on sexuality that I did in St Saviour’s just before Christmas. I am always surprised that people have never thought that there are some very different ways of decision making – different ethical moods – at work in…

  • Missionary Position

    In addition to working at the University of Stirling today, I'm going to Edinburgh o­n missionary service. The people there need someone to teach them about human sexuality you see.1730 in the Cornerstone Bookshop. Be there or know nothing!More details o­n this poster

  • Shrove Tuesday

    It occurred to me yesterday that the Shrove Tuesday thing in the supermarkets really is strange. The idea of pancake day was to use up all your eggs before Lent. Now we are encouraged to buy all the ingredients in order to use them up again. The genius of late western capitalism frying in a…