Augustine of Canterbury

Apple-v-Windows

2010-07-31T03:08:00.002+01:00

I’m a long time and convicted PC user so my recent purchase and use of an iPhone 3Gs is a little surprising, even to me.

Windows Phones Didn’t Deliver

Over the years as phones have turned into PDA’s I’ve migrated from Palms to XDA’s running Windows Mobile. Sadly my last device was so unreliable that even answering calls was a lottery. Some of the programmes worked at first but almost immediately became erratic. It’s a pity because Windows Mobile offered a world of possibilities but it delivered a phone that drops calls and where the programmes rarely functioned reliably.

Why an iPhone ?

So when it came to choosing a new phone I knew the Apple OS had increased stability over window OS, chiefly achieved by limiting user choices and options, so I thought that I would trade flexibility for reliability. Although I had previously mocked the Apple OS for only recently introducing cut and paste I made the leap and purchased my first ever Apple device.

I'm Totally Blown Away

Using the iPhone has been a pure pleasure: it just works in a way that most windows mobile users have forgotten. I think that only if you've had an unreliable device can you understand the sheer joy of say a mapping programme working every time so you can navigate in an unfamiliar location.

Apps are really great

The apps or programmes are amazing and enable you to do easily what otherwise you could only do on a full size PC. I can take and post photos to my Facebook page, text whole groups of people, order a delivery from the Supermarket, check the news, use the integrated iPod, browse the Internet, twitter, watch BBC24, e-bay, e-mail, find my nearest church and order coffee capsules - and all of this without a crash or hitch.

Getting Older

It occurs to me that my new found love of the Apple iPhone, it's ease of use and the fact that it just works, might well be connected to my getting older. I no longer have the time or the patience to fiddle with the programmes.

Will I be switching to Apple for my PC ?

No, because they're far too expensive (both hardware and software), they don't do half the things I need to do and because there are compatibility issues for me.

Why am I writing this ?

Because I genuinely surprised by what a positive and great experience using an iPhone has been and I thought that I'd share the story.

Benedict XVI - A Disastrous Papacy

2010-07-29T15:17:00.000+01:00

No thank you

I've just very politely declined to be in the congregation at Westminster Abbey when Benedict XVI visits in September. Why ? Because I can't in all conscience give my support to the worst papacy in living memory. I would have been absolutely delighted to have worshipped along side John XXIII because he was a saintly reformer. But Benedict XVI is an altogether different character.

Misogyny with added intolerance

To have listed support for the ordination of women as a crime against the sacraments adds contemptible intolerance to misogyny. Trying to stifle discussion is symptomatic of knowing that the argument is already lost. Ostriches, sand and heads come to mind.

Anglican Ordinate an Ecumenical Disaster

Opportunistic interfering with the internal discussions of the Anglican Communion and the Church of England would never have been even contemplated in previous papacies. The discourtesy of not consulting the Archbishop of Canterbury was truly astonishing. 45 years of ecumenical work have been sidelined for offers to SSPX and FiF, which reveals Benedict's über conservative agenda.

Old Vestments and the Latin Mass

Perhaps we should have guessed what this papacy was going to be like when Benedict XVI began to wear old fashioned vestments and major papal masses returned to using Latin. People seem to have forgotten that the Roman Catholic Church was on it's knees and half dead at the time of the 2nd Vatican Council. The Councils reforms were absolutely necessary (literally vital) to the survival of the RC Church. To attempt, even a partial roll back, of Vatican II will result in serious decline; it's like a smoker who having survived lung cancer starts smoking again and proclaiming it to be the cure for his disease, the result is inevitable. Bringing back the Latin Mass is only the answer to the question - 'what could we do to make matters worse' !

So no thank you, I won't be pew fodder for Mr Ratzinger; his papacy is a depressing funeral liturgy.

What is it with TV programmes about the supernatural ?

2010-07-27T21:56:00.000+01:00

Has anyone else noticed that whilst we live in an age of widespread disbelief and atheism there's a lot of popular entertainment about the supernatural ?

It's almost as if the reductionist and comfortless philosophy of 'this is all there is' has caused a desire or hope in the collective popular imagination which finds it's outlet in TV programmes & films about the supernatural.

I also wonder if this is connected with the collective dis-ease with organised religion and formal belief systems; it appears more acceptable to believe in speaking to dead relatives than the Nicene Creed.

Can we learn anything useful from this ? I believe so:-

Firstly most people are probably agnostic rather than atheist, waiting or actively looking for underlying realities and that which lies beyond the observable world.

Secondly people crave hope; the blunt message of atheism that people cease to exist is just not believed by many who hope that there is life beyond death and meaning to their existence.

Thirdly the church has failed to attract many 'hopers' because we're obsessed with formulas of orthodoxy as the very basis of membership. It's really very telling that we recite the 4th Cent Nicene Creed every Sunday, originally composed to refute the heresies of the early church and totally meaningless to most enquirers.

Fourthly if we were more like fellow travellers and enquirers and less like the Spanish inquisition people might want to spend some time with us. Absolute certainty and condemnation of those who don't share our views are deeply unattractive traits.

The harvest is plentiful but the labourers are few

Time to confidently reassert we're Catholic and Reformed

2010-07-26T16:00:00.000+01:00

Current Climate

Those making the most noise at the moment are heavily criticising the CofE, denying it's catholicity, proposing we're about to become a protestant sect and recommending the Ordinate or full RC membership (oh yes there's a real difference between those two!)

Proclaiming the Positive

Somebody needs to be putting the positive side of the Women Bishops legislation in it's current form and reasserting the continuing Catholicity of the Church of England.

Apartheid is Ending

The 1992 promise to Parliament, as I understand it, was an honoured place within the church for those opposed to the ordination of women. Within is the operative word. In my mind that did not permit setting up a separate church within the church, pretending the rest of us don't exist or treating fellow Christians like lepers. So I view the end of FiF jurisdiction as a positive outcome; FiF'ers will have to rejoin the mainstream church and exhibit the previously lacking virtues of grace, tolerance and inclusivity. In return women bishops will no doubt with equal grace and tolerance follow a code of practice and transfer Episcopal functions to a male bishop when requested. The separate church within a church solution didn't work, was an ecclesiological aberration, a most unfortunate mistake and it's end is entirely desirable.

Facing the Future with Confidence and Vigour

It's now time for Anglo-Catholics to assert that we are the Catholic and Apostolic Church of England, proclaiming the faith of the scriptures and the catholic creeds. We are reformed because the church needs reformation when it is in error and disrepair. In so far as we are able to discern it the Church of England is the church in this country that is most closely following God's will and Christ's intention for his church and we say that confidently and without apology or qualification. It is God's will that women should be Deacons, Priests and Bishops and we lead the universal church is that discernment. We call upon all churches to admit women to the fullness of Holy Orders, without further delay.

Satori - a moment of realisation

2010-07-26T00:44:00.002+01:00

Satori in Zen Buddhism is a moment of realisation or enlightenment after which nothing is quite the same.

I'm reminded of Satori by those bloggers who being heavily critical of the Church of England are advocating joining the Roman Catholic Church via the Ordinate. That's because becoming a Roman Catholic requires an assertion that every act ministry in the Church of England has been invalid: every eucharist, baptism, confirmation, marriage and ordination are according to Rome invalid. What a dreadful moment of realisation that must be ! (and let's be crystal clear that I believe this to be a totally false realisation)

The question I want to ask is: if you've had a moment of realisation like that how can you then continue to be a member of the Church of England ? Or more astonishingly how can you with integrity continue to minister in the CofE ?

Surely it's intolerable to be ready to repudiate your entire sacramental ministry whilst still celebrating the very sacraments you are now convinced to be invalid.

To spell it out: the gap between deciding to convert and ending your Anglican Church membership can't be too long. Long enough to make practical arrangements but not so long that any sense of integrity is mocked.

Papal Mass Only £25

2010-07-23T14:20:00.000+01:00

Isn't it a sin to sell the sacraments for money ? I just wondered if the £25 it costs for parking and a 'pilgrim pack' at the UK Birmingham Mass was really just a way of cover up a 25 quid charge for a papal mass ?

Frankly I think it is just a cover up and that's it's particularly galling if like many Roman Catholics you've already contributed heavily to the cost of the papal visit via a special parish collection. Not only are you being charged for an allegedly free sacrament, but you've paid twice.

That's not quite right is it ?

An open letter to the Archbishops

2010-06-25T14:31:00.000+01:00

An open letter to the Archbishops’ regarding their proposed amendments

Dear Archbishop Williams and Archbishop Sentamu,

It is with great dismay and disappointment that I read your proposed amendments to the Women Bishop’s draft legislation issued on Monday 21st June. I doubt there are many who will feel this offers good news. Far from being attentive to the full diversity of voices within the Church of England, these amendments suggest that you, our Archbishops, are primarily concerned with a particularly vocal minority. Neither do you seem to trust that the Legislative Drafting Committee have, in fact, been extremely attentive to the diversity of voices for the past year and have worked hard to come up with the current proposals. There is nothing to suggest, for example, that you are listening to the voices of those who signed petitions in 2008 requesting a single clause measure. Or those, like WATCH, who have made it clear that the proposed legislation already demands many concessions and compromises from the simple single clause measure they requested and which has been favoured by all other Anglican provinces who have chosen to open the episcopate to women.

There will be many who will be unable to support the proposed transfer arrangements and continual public undermining of women’s spiritual authority implicit in these amendments (paragraph 6), even if it means proceeding sooner rather than later.

The smoke and mirror strategy of giving jurisdiction by virtue of the Measure, rather than transfer or delegation in effect implies that the Church of England as a whole is ambiguous about the identity and authority of both Bishops who are female and male priests who accept their ministry. This is a dangerous precedent to set and leaves women in ministry vulnerable as they, along with every Christian, continue the battle against the principalities and powers of darkness but without the full support of the Church that recognised and authorised their divine calling to ordained ministry. It is a poor consolation prize to offer consecrated women fuller legal rights with one hand (para 15.1) while continuing to set up structures that call into question their spiritual authority (paragraph 13). The interpretation of the Lambeth Conference resolution (1998) which undergirds this proposal (para 2) fails to recognise that both those who assent to and those who dissent to the ordination of women to the priesthood are loyal Anglicans because what we hold in common; our love for Christ, our common identity as brothers and sisters in Christ, takes precedence over our disagreement over differing understandings of the Episcopal authority. Status as loyal Anglicans is not a carte blanche to demand special provisions.

I refute completely that the Church of England has managed to operate a practical polity (para 13). The practical polity is in fact extremely dysfunctional, cripples the ministry of women, in some diocese more than others, and has done nothing to bring about greater communion, but instead fosters division and discrimination and continues to damage the Church.

Many people on both sides of the debate have struggled with the Act of Synod because they are committed to making it work and will continue to wrestle with whatever General Synod manages to agree upon, because of their love for the communities this Church serves, often despite the toxic legacy of the Act. This is illustrated by the fact that Prayer Vigils will take place around the country, in Ripon, Guildford, Newcastle and Lichfield Cathedrals, during the General Synod debates, genuinely drawing together the diversity of voices to which you refer, but to whom you clearly have not listened.

Where ever the solution may lie to the question of how to bring about Women Bishops, I think it is unlikely to manifest itself in the creation of Church of England ghettos that will further isolate those who are opposed and fatally undermine the ministry of those who assent and have the unenviable task of making such convoluted proposals work.

Where are the proposals that will in fact ensure that we simply have Bishops? Consecrated because we have discerned God’s calling and gifting within them, regardless of those things that are declared unimportant in relation to our identity in Christ; race, gender, social status? Where are the proposals that will enable them to fulfil that role with joy, confidence and the minimum of hindrance?

When will the Church of England accept that to set up structures that implicitly infer that some people are less a child of God than others is just poor theology and a stumbling block to our proclamation of the gospel?

I realise that the sound of our church in great pain as it labours to bring something into new birth is difficult for you both, as our Archbishops, and for many others to hear. But it would be good for you to recognise that the expression of pain is not necessarily an indication that something is fundamentally wrong. The Church of England, through Synod, declared many decades ago that there were, in fact, no theological objections to women’s ordained ministry. I would like to see it support its statements with clear and unambiguous actions.

Your sister in Christ,

Lindsay Southern

22nd June 2010

21 Melltowns Green

Pickhill

North Yorkshire

YO7 4LL

I had hoped I wouldn't live this long

2010-06-08T18:43:00.003+01:00

I've died and gone to hell ......

11 Top Blogs by Augustine of Canterbury

2010-04-29T14:20:00.001+01:00

These are Augustine of Canterbury's top blogs;-

(Just click the title to visit)

Exclusive News of UK Papal Visit

Half of FiF Clergy to Retire within 10 years

Apostolic Succession an Anglo-Catholic Fetish

Rearranging the Deck Chairs on the Titanic

New Pope Needed

Fr John Henry Newman an Anglican

1662 Prayer Book An Anglo-Catholic Interpretation

Anglo-Papalist or Anglo-Catholic

A Counter Offer

A Positive Anglo-Catholic Agenda

I'm Not Going to Rome

Anti-Catholicism or Valid Criticism

2010-04-28T17:25:00.000+01:00

Anti-Catholicism or Valid Criticism

I've noticed a tendency amongst a number of commentators to cry prejudice & anti-Catholicism at any criticism of the Roman Catholic Church. No doubt there are indeed a few people jumping on the band wagon, delighted at the failings of the worlds largest church.

This Affects Every Christian

But not everyone; because most of us know that recent scandals affect everyone. I've gotten strange looks on the tube / underground for wearing my clerical collar. I know unchurched people have draw less than charitable conclusions about the whole Christian community; protestant, orthodox, non-conformist, reformed and Roman Catholic. There will be jokes about clergy / priests and children for years to come. Generations of genuinely worthy work with schools, children and young people is diminished, probably permanently. Good & holy work is literally undone by this tragedy.

Combination of Offenders & Obsession with Obedience.

But it's not just the offenders who have caused such havoc; it's the institution's reaction that multiplies the effect. The Legionaries of Christ insistence on not criticising spiritual superiors enabled it's 'celibate' founder Marcial Maciel to have children (not families) with multiple women and to sexually abuse them. Making victims take vows of silence meant that it took decades to correctly identify the scale of the problem and address it appropriately. It's not just a few bad apples;- it's an attitude towards authority and covering up that magnifies the original offence.

Cover Up the Moral Equivalent of Collusion

In normal institutions these offences would have been publicised thus minimising the chances of recidivism. But in a heavily hierarchical institution, obsessed with obedience, with an eye on public perception; secrecy permits / enables recidivism. Isn't that moral collusion by delinquency ? (sharing in the evil of the offence by failing to take appropriate action) In essence a few individuals committed grievous offences but the institution of the Roman Catholic Church multiplied the offence by allowing recidivism (re-offence) and denying the victims true justice; as seen to be done. Thus hundred of millions of Christians are tarred with the same brush.

Illustration

The illustration above by Scarfe is a truly tragic comment on how the world now sees Christians and the church.

Exclusive News of the UK Papal Visit

2010-04-25T23:52:00.001+01:00

Obviously I'm not going to reveal my source for this; but I'm very happy to tell readers of this blog exclusively:-

Queen will meet Pope in Scotland

We'll be spared the sight of the Pope and Queen in London, with all the attendant pomp. Instead the Queen, who is not breaking her holiday, will meet the Pope in Scotland. I think a single picture of the Pope shaking hands with the Queen will suffice. This kind of low key, minimum publicity meeting is an excellent idea and avoids pictures and images that some (including me) would find hard to stomach.

Pope will go to Lambeth Palace

The Pope will go to Lambeth Palace to meet with Archbishop Rowan Williams. Again another great idea, it makes the point that the Pope is visiting an Anglican country where ++Rowan is the head of the established church. A picture of the Pope and ++Rowan in front of a portrait of a reformation archbishop will probably be too much to ask, but the symbolism of the location will do nicely. I'd advise Rowan to give the pope a 1662 Book of Common Prayer as they're somewhat keen on Anglican patrimony in Rome at the moment. Whether he'll read the 39 Articles on the plane home I guess we'll never know, but there's always hope.

Pope will go to Westminster Abbey

Of course it would be unthinkable for a visiting dignitary not to lay a wreath of remembrance at the tomb of the unknown solider; perhaps in the silent moment that follows the pope will reflect on his own part in he second world war. I'm almost tempted to go and watch. A guided tour of the post reformation Kings and Queens tombs would probably be in order too.

Pope will address both Houses of Parliament

Perhaps more problematically the pope will also address both houses of parliament in St Stephens Hall. I can't honestly see a big turn out from amongst MP's for this. My concern here is the UK giving the pope an official platform to promulgate his views and inevitably criticise the majority of us for not wanting to live in a Roman Catholic state. The thought that as a country we have collectively invited this man to address our parliament worries me; perhaps he can be persuaded to restrict his remarks, a befits an invited guest. If not I might feel impelled to attend and protest, as is my right.

Get a Grip !

2010-04-25T22:21:00.001+01:00

The RC blogosphere is alive with indignation about the Foreign Office memo. So what's the problem;-

Can't take a joke ?

Lost your sense of humour ?

Too near the truth for you ?

OK - the idea about him opening an abortion clinic is a bit tasteless, but a papal brand of condoms and blessing a gay partnership are quite funny and thoroughly deserved considering the actual consequences of some Roman Catholic doctrine.

We shouldn't forget that opposition to contraception is not just a slightly nutty idea, held by a few religious fruit cakes it really kills people in Africa who are consequently exposed to HIV and Aids. Most health professionals know that availability of condoms would make a big difference to infection rates. The Roman Catholic teaching on abstinence is just another example naivety. Make no mistake, this doctrine kills people.

We also shouldn't forget the sheer hypocrisy of church whose clergy are predominantly gay by orientation (I've reliable RC clergy friends who put the percentage of RC gay clergy at between 75-95%) but who teach that being gay is intrinsically disordered.

The Pope can't be above criticism or his teaching beyond debate, it's a free country and the old deference is long dead, as he is about to discover when his visit to the UK is also marked by the prominence and presence of those who beg to differ.

Why I'm Voting Labour

2010-04-19T17:11:00.003+01:00

I'm voting Labour because I remember previous conservative (Tory) governments and I don't want to live under that kind of regime ever again;-

Death of British Industry

The Thatcher regime ('79-'90) presided over the near total destruction of British Manufacturing Industry. Driven by the dog eat dog ideology of uncontrolled competition the government let British industry be savaged by low wage, low tech economies elsewhere in the world. They peddled the myth that a managed re-orientation / re-tooling for a high skill, high tech economy wasn't possible and the result was (at least) 3 million unemployed, tens of thousands of companies closed and the creation of huge industrial waste lands all around the country. British Industry died and we became of nation of financial services consultants, credit controllers and call customer care operatives.

War on Education

Thatcher hated the (mostly) egalitarian British education system and especially teachers, who were allegedly all part of a left wing conspiracy. Money was deliberately diverted from education, school buildings got into a terrible state, there were daily news stories of leaking roofs and classes held in unheated rooms and portacabins. The underfunding got so bad that parents were asked to buy basic teaching material and even children books. Thatcher wanted a vocational based education system that simply trained monkeys / people to work in call answering centers (and the like) and did not educate people beyond strict necessity. Learning for it own sake was anathema and Tory rhetoric against teachers reached Stalinist mantra heights.

End the NHS

In Thatcher Newspeak (Orwell 1984) 'The NHS is safe in our hands' - but the truth was very very different. Thatcher had an ideological hatred of a universal health care system as intrinsically socialistic; so the race was on to bring the NHS to it's knees whilst extolling the virtues of the private health care sector. Waiting lists grew, wards and sometimes whole hospitals closed, NHS employees were vilified (especially nurses) and all the while plush private wards and services prospered at the expenses of the NHS. The poor literally paid for the private health care of the rich, it was Robin Hood in reverse. The lowest point came when tax breaks for private health care were proposed; everyone was asked to pay for the private health care of the rich, unbelievable!

Get on your bike

Who can forget the Tory Employment Secretary, Norman Tebbit, telling the 3 million unemployed to get on their bikes and look for work? Whole areas of the country were in economic meltdown and unemployed people faced a lifetime without work, there was a tangible atmosphere in some towns of complete despair. Benefits for the unemployed were cut, and cut again and the unemployed were blamed for being lazy and not having a job;- the victim was blamed for the crime ! Tory spin doctors spread the story that Thatcher was 'upset' that people thought her (and the government) uncaring !

Tell Sid He Was Robbed

Any kind of business or enterprise that was owned by the people was up for sale on the cheap, partly to disguise underlying economic failure. When your gas bill is enormous, the gas company's profits equally enormous and most ordinary people no longer own shares in the energy companies you have the Tories to thank for that. When the banking system almost collapsed and British de-mutualised building societies were at the heart of the British crisis, you have the Tories (and the carpet baggers) to thank for that. This was always about big business getting it's hands on the peoples assets and never about creating a sharing owning democracy. As Harold Macmillan told us you can only sell the family silver once;- in our case it was sold cheaply, and we are still paying the price with every overpriced electricity, gas, water, train, and telephone bill. We were robbed.

War on ordinary people

During the last Tory government there was an unending list of different people / groups to be singled out and vilified in the press, legislated against and blamed for all the ills of the country. One month it was single parents, then gays and lesbians, then miners, then teachers, then the unemployed, then immigrants, then trades unionists, then Argentineans .... Strangely enough Old Etonians, stock brokers, company directors and the rich seemed immune from the latest group to be publically reviled and given a good spanking, funny that !

Poll Tax Riots

I watched the police clash with thousands of rioters in Trafalgar Square with open mouthed disbelief. I knew it was bad in Britain under the Tories and I knew the Poll Tax was both unfair (un-progressive) and unpopular, but I couldn't quite believe I was watching the nearest thing to a full revolution unfold on the TV news. Ordinary people were on the street along side the usual political activists and were angry at the arrogance of the Tory government's proposed poll tax. It was obvious evidence that the government just didn't care about the plight of ordinary people, it was driven by ideology and the interests of a tiny minority of rich people with high local council tax bills.

An Alternative Universe

At times during 79-97 I thought I wondered into an alternative universe where black was white, truth a lie and up was down. It was a truly surreal period;- almost like a conscious re-enactment of Orwell's 1984;- we were told we were getting better health care, better education, better transport, creating a share owning democracy, the economy was thriving and the 'Great' was being put back into Britain ! But we experienced the exact opposite every day.

The Tories Look After Their Own

You could sum up the last Tory government with the aphorism 'the rich got richer and the poor got poorer'. The interests of big business and multi-national companies were very well looked after with any kind of regulation, safeguard or law that hindered rampant profiteering immediately withdrawn. Entrepreneurs, 'Loads of Money' Stockbrokers and Merchant Bankers were hailed as national heroes. Make no mistake the Tories are backed by the rich and big business for a simple reason;- they look after their interests and place them before you and your welfare, every single time.

Cameron Isn't Different

Frankly I cringe when I hear Cameron saying the 'new' Tory party is now friendly to gays and lesbians because I remember clause 28 and government inspired campaigns of hate in the newspapers. I know that the 'Big Society' Tory manifesto theme is newspeak for massive cuts in government / social expenditure. You only need to look at those pictures of Cameron, Johnson and Osborne as members of the Bullingdon Club whilst at Oxford University to know that the Tory party stands for government by the elite in the interests of the few.

Labour's Record

I know that Labour have made some serious mistakes, in my opinion mostly by not being radical enough. However;- the NHS has new hospitals and wards, waiting lists are greatly reduced, patients have rights under the NHS charter, pay for NHS workers is better, new schools have been built, class rooms refurbished, teachers pay has increased, formerly publically owned businesses are at least regulated, unemployment is still too high but people also still receive benefits whilst trying to find a new job, single parents still received benefits, child benefit is still paid, old people get a winter fuel allowance and state pensions have increased. The Labour party isn't perfect, far from it, but it's a whole lot better than the Tory alternative.

I'm Thatcher's Child

If the tone and passion of what I've said surprises you; it shouldn't because I'm Thatcher's child. I lived through the 18 years of conservative government, it politicised and motivated me; I joined the Labour party, I worked hard day and night for a Labour victory in the 1997 election, I've organised elections for the Labour party and stood as a candidate. Thatcher made me a conviction member of the Labour Party for life. And when you look at the polls and can't understand why, with Labour being allegedly so unpopular, the Tories still can't win, there's a simple reason;- there is a whole generation of people, exactly like me, who remember what it was like to live under a Tory government and who consequently will never, never, ever vote conservative.

German cartoon offends some / saddens me

2010-04-12T17:35:00.003+01:00

For those who haven't been following the sex abuse scandal in Germany, the latest twist involves Roman Catholics outraged by the above cartoon. The cartoon appeared in the satirical magazine Titanic, on Good Friday (of all days) and is suggestive of a sexual act.

I'm not disposed to be outraged by this kind of graphic criticism, I just think it's a powerful and very sad indictment; because the cartoon deliberately plays upon Matthew 25.40 'whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me'. Perhaps a cartoon echoing Mark 9.42 'and if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea'. would have been more fitting, but probably equally offensive to some.

Instead of getting outraged I would advise putting energy into reforming the church, ending the abuses of an obedience and secrecy obsessed hierarchy, drawing women and laity into considering disciplinary matters and calling for end to compulsory celibacy.

A spot of heartfelt and public repentance by those in charge, including B16, would go a long way to restoring the much damaged credibility of the church.

7 Ordinations in England & Wales

2010-04-10T13:42:00.002+01:00

I was very kindly invited for drinks with Roman Catholic Clergy at a London presbytery. As I looked around the room, half the Roman Catholic clergy were ex-Anglicans, which supported my long held intuition that really quite serious decline in the English Roman Catholic Church is masked by convert clergy, which combined with the influx of Eastern European Roman Catholics make things appear stable. Under the surface things are very far from stable; how many Roman Catholic Clergy were ordained in England and Wales last year ? The answer is;-

That's right, one more than six and one less than eight !. The CofE number is around 500 (can't be exact because I can't find the statistics on-line, but it was 500 in the previous year).

You can proclaim the glories of celibacy and how it's not at all to blame for paedophilia, you can proclaim the glories of the Latin mass and compare those who criticise the Pope for inaction with anti-Semites BUT people have voted with their feet.

I have Roman Catholic friends who KNOW that unless there is serious and deep rooted reform, of the 2nd Vatican Council kind, Roman Catholicism will collapse in the West within a generation, and that's not a wild assertion sadly it's supported by these kind of hard facts.

Half of FiF clergy to have retired within 10 years

2010-04-10T12:03:00.005+01:00

As you've probably know some are seriously considering the possibility that women Bishops won't happen for around 10 years and that when it does happen it will be without any provision for those opposed.

That set me wondering what the church might look like in ten years time; which led me to start comparing FiF clergy with their age as declared in Crockfords and putting the data on a spread sheet. Oh my !

Here's what I can tell you:-

Forward in Faith Clergy

Average age 58

In 2020 (ten years time) 52% will be 65 or over

11% are 30-40 years of age

15% are 40-50 years of age

24% are 50-60 years of age

24% are 60-70 years of age

26% are over 70 years of age

Forward in Faith claim around 500 clergy members which includes retired clergy, this is roughly equal to 2.6% of C of E clergy.

Forward in Faith have relatively few new vocations, compared with the wider church. Projecting current vocations into the future, in 20 years (2030) Forward in Faith (C of E) will have only 125 working (stipendiary) clergy members.

None of this takes into account those who might leave for Rome.

My Conclusions;-

Punching above their weight

This is a group who punch far above their statistical weight, at 2½ percent they ought to be a small minority voice, but time and again they have made the national news and influenced decision way beyond their actual numbers. If they all went to Rome tomorrow, it could be business as usual in the C of E, because their actual numbers are insignificant.

Theology, Symbolism and Perception

Clearly the FiF hoo haa is more about theology, symbolism and perception than concern about the loss of clergy numbers. Is the inclusion of conservative Anglo-Catholics necessary for Anglican identity ? Would their departure damage the Anglican claim to be both Catholic and Reformed ? How do you balance the FiF wish to exclude women from Priesthood and Leadership (Bishops) against Women's right to be included and treated as equal ? If a working compromise can not be found, would it be so wrong to part company ?

Time & Demographics

As I've blogged before; FiF does not have time on it's side, the issues it seeks to raise are of a specific time and place, the issues of a singular generation. Not only will there be significantly less of them in 10 and 20 years but the church and world will move on. People shouldn't forget that the Holy Spirit is subversive; John 23rd was elected Pope and everyone thought he would be a caretaker and a safe pair of hands. He changed the Roman Catholic Church forever with the 2nd Vatican Council. In 20 years we could so easily have married and women clergy in the Roman Church.

Methodology

I used the clergy named on the Bishop of Fulham's web site and Crockfords Clerical Directory. My assumptions are that the Fulham Jurisdiction is typical of FiF and that the Times of London largely reports truthfully. If anyone wants to research and number crunch the whole of FiF to prove me wrong by a few percent, feel free. If I've made a serious statistical error I'll be delighted to print a correction, upon proof supplied.

Uganda and Bishop Elect Mary Glasspool

2010-04-09T16:30:00.000+01:00

So Mr Orombi, the Primate of Uganda, has resigned from the Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion because he has heard that the North American Church doesn't persecute homosexuals properly or indeed enough.

Clearly he's under the impression that the Anglican Communion has the right to tell it's autonomous provinces how to behave and who the love (in both senses). If that were so the European and North American churches would long ago have demanded the removal of Archbishop Akinola for saying homosexuals were worse than 'dogs and pigs' OR we would have demanded the resignation of ALL the Ugandan Bishops for keeping silence when a law was proposed in their country criminalising homosexuality with the death penalty.

The Anglican Communion is a meeting or collection of autonomous provinces; there is no means of enforcing uniformity of belief or practice, get over it, ECUSA are perfectly entitled to elect who they chose as a Bishop and there is NOTHING you can do about it. That's the difference between Rome and Canterbury; one is about uniformity, power, and enforcement and the other is about respecting & understanding difference whilst trying to find common ground;- unity in diversity.

I'm not sure who is divorcing who here;- Orombi and Akinola don't want to be in the same church as Mary Glasspool, but frankly their beliefs bear so little resemblance to mine that I'm tempted to help them pack !

Full, open and blatant schism

2010-03-31T20:53:00.000+01:00

On Maundy Thursday I shall go to our cathedral, renew my ordination vows, receive communion from my Bishop(s) and collect oils for use throughout the year, as will thousands of other priests, deacons and lay ministers across the country. It's an occasion that symbolises and embodies communion, in the full sense.

As usual every member of Forward in Faith (FiF) will be absent, having set up and attended their own, schismatic, chrism mass.

This leads me to reflect on the eve of Maundy Thursday, how exactly am I in communion with members of Forward in Faith ?

The answer is that I am not in communion with members of Forward in Faith ! They will not and do not received or share communion with me or my Bishop(s). Members of Forward in Faith have to all intents and purposes left, abandoned and deserted the Church of England, the only vestige of the their membership being the occupation of Anglican property and payment of Anglican stipends.

Does nobody share my outrage at this blatant act of schism ? Has everybody come to regard this as normal and acceptable ? Is this treating fellow Christians as if they've got a nasty communicable disease evenly vaguely Christ like ?

The irony of Anglicanorum coetibus is that Rome wouldn't accept this behaviour and schism for 30 seconds;- if Forward in Faith set up a separate chrism mass in the Roman Catholic Church, excommunication would be quickly followed by unemployment.

Whilst I love our church for it's tolerance and diversity I just really wonder how much longer we can go on like this ?

Pope to become Archbishop of Canterbury

2010-03-31T17:46:00.002+01:00

Yes, you read that right ! On his visit in September this year the Pope is going to be the Archbishop of Canterbury for a day. See the article here http://bit.ly/9cdj5O

I wonder what those so keen to leave the Anglican church will make of that ?

I wonder what that means for Apostolicae Curae ?

I wonder what that means for Ecumenical relations ?

Frankly you can just ignore those shouting that ordaining women had killed ARCIC because the quiet truth is that there is great deal of respect for the Anglican Church in Rome. Many Roman Catholics know that women priests will come to Rome, sooner or latter and that Anglicanorum coetibus was addressed to North American former Anglicans who had already left the Episcopal church. The idea that the Pope wrote Anglicanorum coetibus for a dozen disaffected UK Anglicans is laughable. So it's business as usual on the ecumenical front .. excellent !

Cranmer

2010-03-19T13:02:00.002Z

I simply draw your attention to the 666th Twitter follower of the right-wing blogger Cranmer. Most apt.

Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic

2010-03-14T00:40:00.003Z

Two simple lists, one big problem:-

Current issues facing the Roman Catholic Church
• Majority take little notice of ethical teaching
• Majority don't see celibacy as necessary or desirable for clergy
• Majority wouldn't object to women clergy
• Majority want more of a say / power
• Majority see Rome / Curia as severely out of touch / isolated from reality

Major initiatives by Benedict 16th
• Re-introducing the Latin Mass
• Lifting the excommunication of SSPX
• Offer to disaffected Anglicans

Metaphor that comes to mind; rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Roma-il-mare

2010-03-11T16:19:00.002Z

A comment on a previous post;- 'The laity aint havin it - Anglicanorum coetibus' by my learned colleague 'The Grumpy Cleric' (see it here http://bit.ly/a2en5a) has reminded me to say something about those planning to retire to Rome-il-mare.

A fairly large percentage (60-75%?) of those considering becoming Roman Catholic under Anglicanorum coetibus are within 10 years or less of retirement age. This raises the real possibility of FiF clergy becoming Roman Catholics whilst being financially supported by our Anglican pension scheme, at very considerable cost.

No doubt some will argue an entitlement to the pension on the basis of years of ministry. But I think there is a moral question to be asked. Considering that many loyal Anglicans will have to give sacrificially and very generously indeed to fund the pension scheme at a time of financial austerity and pension shortfall; is it right they should have to pay a pension to those who desert the church of their baptism, ministry and communion for another? Is that morally defensible? At the very least it's a question that has to be asked.

The stipend is not as such a salary or entitlement but an allowance on which to live; whether the pension, based on a stipend is a legal entitlement remains to be seen / tested.

Correct me if I'm wrong but did it not used to be the case that those who deserted the church and joined another were deprived of their orders and thereby had their pension entitlement reduced to 1/32nd of the original total. I mention this because I think the debate on the morality of pension payments ought NOT to take place with a presumption of impotence on the part of the C of E. I think a helpful and cooperative attitude would be engendered if everyone understood that no-one goes to Rome with their pension in tact as a right, but as a gift, if appropriate, of the sending church.

It also occurs to me that an agreement amongst all the main stream denominations that churches receiving clergy take on responsibility for their pension liability to date would stop churches getting other denominations clergy en-mass on the cheap. The 'entirely self financing' aspiration of the proposed ordinate strikes me as somewhere between unrealistic and frankly uncharitable; Rome is asking a lot of people, especially younger men with families, to sacrifice security & a regular income for a very uncertain & unspecified future.

The Death Cookie

2010-03-11T13:58:00.003Z

In the shadow of the Great Smokey mountains, around 30km from Knoxville Tennessee, in a town called Pigeon Forge; The small congregation of Conner Heights Baptist Church purchased and distributed a leaflet entitled 'The Death Cookie', the title being a reference to the Eucharistic bread.

It so upset local Roman Catholics that the Bishop Richard F. Stika said to the local press that he was “greatly saddened by the reprehensible acts of prejudice and hatred of a few souls who, out of ignorance of Catholic teachings, have promoted the distribution of anti-Catholic tracts.” The Baptist pastor, Rev. Jonathan Hatcher, then ended the distribution, expressing regret.

Wondering what could possibly cause such offence I found the offending tract on the internet, and you can see it @ http://bit.ly/dye88U

This is an excerpt:-

It all seems pretty unexceptional to me. You can find such sentiments expressed in print, and now the internet, throughout the world. A visit to the Protestant Truth Society in Fleet Street will open your eyes if you never seen this kind of thing before.

It all leaves me wondering if the resort to (self) censorship on the grounds of offence caused isn't a big mistake. Can faith / religion really be beyond criticism and debate ? Some people are so easily offended by the mildest criticism, must we avoid upsetting them at all costs ? Surely robust debate is legitimate ?

I don't particularly like what Chick Publications are printing, much of it deeply flawed, factually incorrect and inclined towards incredible (literally) conspiracy, but I think I'd happily defend their right to free speech and a rigorous debate. Don't censor them; answer them back !

If you've a few free minutes you can see other unbelievable (literally) publications by the same company here;- http://bit.ly/cHXwbA

Abused then asked to pay

2010-03-04T15:26:00.000Z

In a truly world class public relations disaster, the RC Bishop of Ferns Dennis Brennan (South East Ireland) has caused widespread outrage by asking parishioners to help pay the legal and compensation costs of a clerical abuse scandal in the Diocese.

The Ferns Diocese alone has paid compensation of €8 million with additional legal costs of €4 million, arising from 60 civil court actions, of which 12 are still pending.

Whilst the bills facing the Diocese may be high it appears that no one stopped to ask themselves if an appeal for the parishes / laity to pay was appropriate given the nature of the scandal. Clearly those in power have failed to grasp the sheer depth of anger felt by church members at not just the abuse but also the subsequent cover-ups. The relationship between the Irish people and Roman Catholic Church has never been lower.

Reaction to the appeal for funds has ranged from refusal to pay to suggestions that the diocese sell assets instead, in particular the former Bishop's Palace and Diocesan Headquarters.

My advice is that if you really can't afford a Public Relations Advisor, at least think carefully about what you say, preferably before you say it.

A summary of compensation paid and outstanding cases in Ireland @

http://bit.ly/dBmLfH

Story of the Ferns Diocese sexual abuse scandal @

http://bit.ly/9Rncy6

Reaction

Vatican should pay @ http://bit.ly/9hW5Gi

Absolutely disgusting @ http://bit.ly/bYN7v4

Nothing lower @ http://bit.ly/bTJLsS

The laity aint havin it - Anglicanorum coetibus

2010-03-04T01:58:00.001Z

I had a really fascinating conversation today with an FiF lay church member whose priest is trying, without success, to persuade the congregation to join him in a swim across the tiber.

It transpires that parish meetings on the matter have been very poorly attended, proposed PCC motions 'accepting' Anglicanorum coetibus have been watered down to a polite 'welcome' and apathy mixed with disinterest, is the general order of the day.

Now we all know of FiF clergy who strong armed their congregations into motions A B & C but apparently leaving the good old C of E is a bridge, or indeed a swim, too far. The laity just aren't as excited about this as the clergy. And there's a good reason for that; the laity have always been able to change church quiet easily, and some have done so over the years. That means that most lay church members are actually quite loyal to their denomination and consequently don't have much understanding, or indeed much sympathy, for clergy drawing Anglican stipends whilst advocating membership of the church of Rome.

In addition the average Anglican has a strong attachment to their physical church building. The idea that masses of lay people are going to forsake their treasured and beloved church buildings for functional and dull school halls is most, most unlikely.

So it would appear that interest in Anglicanorum coetibus is largely a matter peculiar to the clergy. Peculiar being an apt choice of word.

New Pope Needed

2010-03-03T19:14:00.000Z

It's very easy to knock an organisation, criticise and complain, but not so easy to step up and say constructively what you'd do if you were in charge.

So instead of complaining about the shortcomings of the current leadership of the Roman Catholic Church I thought I draft out my own personal manifesto. Here's what I'd do if I were elected Pope !

Celibacy / Marriage / Women Clergy

I'd immediately allow clergy to marry and admit women to the priesthood and the episcopy on an absolutely and totally equal basis. This would transform the church overnight, and be hugely popular with the vast majority of members. Women in leadership change organisations for the better and on just one issue; child sexual abuse by the clergy, women would ensure the mistakes of the past are never repeated.

Office by election

All church officials;- Area Deans, Bishops, Archbishops, Cardinals and the Pope will be elected by the whole church on a one member one vote basis, including all baptised members. Can you image what a massive difference it would make to have elections for all positions of leadership ? An final end to the old boys network, old college networks etc. Let us choose our church leaders on merit, track record, spirituality, ability to the do the job and popular consent.

Decentralisation

The curia in Rome will be dissolved and all powers devolved to the National Churches. I will publically apologise for the acts of repression by the Papacy and Curia, in particular the suppression of liberation theology. I will also publically apologise for the church supporting various unchristian right wing regimes, especially in Latin America.

Primus Inter-Pares

The Pope will return to being 'first among equals' within the College of Cardinals. Ring kissing and genuflecting to the pope will be banned. As Pope I will walk bear foot from Rome to Assisi, as an act of penance for the lack of humility by my predecessors and pray at the shrine of St Francis for forgiveness. Future Popes will retire at 75, or be removed through a vote of no-confidence by the college of cardinals.

3rd Vatican Council

I will call a 3rd Vatican Council, to be held not in Rome but in Africa, among the poorest, to decide upon the way forward for the church. With decisions taken by majority voting and participants drawn not just from the clergy but also from the laity. On the agenda will be an end to indulgences, and an end to the prohibition on contraception, an end to the modern Marian dogmas, an end to papal infallibility, the withdrawal of the filioque clause from the creed and the introduction of church councils for every parish to work in cooperation with the priest in administering parishes.

Ending Exclusivity

I'd celebrate mass and invite every Christian of good will to take communion with me, thus ending the exclusivity of the Roman Catholic Church permanently. I'd apologise for the excesses that led to the Reformation and Counter Reformation and invite other church leaders and denominations to consider joining a new confederation of churches in communion with each other but still retaining their distinctive character and practices.

Wine advice - go for the animal on the label

2010-02-26T17:15:00.003Z

I have been interested in wine since the 1980's. I was one of the first members of the Sunday Times Wine Club, one of the first customers of Majestic Wine Warehouse when it opened in London. I have taken courses, visited vineyards, bored people into a stupor at dinner parties and I have drunk literally thousands of bottles of wine. So I like to think that I know something about wine. However ....

I got married last Summer to Mrs Augustine of Canterbury who chooses wine not by the country, region, grape variety or vintage but by the animal on the label. Yes that's right;- she looks along the shelves for an animal image on the label and buys that wine.

Now you might have thought that this somewhat eccentric method of choosing a wine would lead, sooner or later, to something truly revolting and undrinkable, but every wine chosen has been a good choice.

God is clearly having the last laugh because 30 years experience of wine drinking has been superseded by the simple search for an animal on the label. I searched in vain for correlation between quality, price, flavour and the choice of images for wine labels, but I'm no nearer to understanding this phenomenon. Next time you're in the supermarket wine aisle, test the theory and let me know what you think.

Am I more effective on-line than in person ?

2010-02-26T14:59:00.002Z

I'm wondering if I'm more effective on-line or in person. It's a serious question because:-

23k have visited the parish web site I run which is more than have EVER visited the actual church building in it's 97 year history. I guess that visiting the physical building might have more of an impact on a person than simply reading a web page on-line, but the fact remains the web site has been read by 350 times more people than visit the church in the same period. Does that make a web site 350 times more efficient at communicating the gospel ? Are peoples lives changed by what they encounter on-line ? I'm asking this question out loud because research shows (http://bit.ly/d5fmGH) that around 50% of churches have no useful internet presence, are they missing a really important opportunity ? I think so.

Around 100 people read this blog each week, which is more than actually hear / listen to my preaching on a Sunday morning (on the basis that half the congregation appear to be asleep!). It might be said that blogs are only glanced at rarely remembered but I've read some profound & moving blogs, as good, as memorable and as moving as any sermon.

When it comes to choosing how to spend your time, I'm beginning to think that an on-line presence isn't an optional extra but essential part of any enterprise, which includes the church and the mission of preaching the gospel. Whereas some of us have a tendency to felt guilty about spending time on-line on the basis that it is not really work, I now think the exact opposite is true;- it's essential work.

This blog was inspired by reading a twitter from Simon Rundell - ' Just spent a brilliant lunchtime. Now back to pushing pixels on behalf of the Gospel...'

Clerical Sexual Abuse

2010-02-25T15:24:00.001Z

I subscribe to a number of Roman Catholic blogs & news feeds and there is an astonishing and frankly deeply depressing stream of stories about clerical sexual abuse and paedophilia. It's made me wonder why the problem seems to be significantly worse in the Roman Catholic Church ? and why the reported incidence this kind of abuse in other churches is lower ?

In short is there something particular about the Roman Catholic Church, its teaching or organisation that makes it more prone to incidents of sexual abuse ?

Compulsory Celibacy

I think that the enforced celibacy of the Roman Clergy contributes to the problem. I'm aware that the Roman church can point to thousands of celibate clergy who have not engaged in sexual abuse and yet the incidence of abuse by clergy from churches that allow the marriage of clergy is demonstrably lower. I suggest there is a strong circumstantial link, even if we don't know the exact causal mechanism.

Authoritarian Church Culture

Clearly one of the major problems that allowed abuse to go on for years unchecked is an authoritarian culture which views clergy as above criticism or complaint. The almost 'God' like regard with which ordinary Roman Catholics were taught to hold the clergy meant people were afraid to speak out, worried about not being believed and so just kept quiet.

Authoritarian Church Structure

The extremely authoritarian structure of the church allowed offenders to be dealt with in secret without public accountability. Indeed accountability appears to be a one way street in the Roman Catholic Church, upwards.

Theology of Priesthood

An almost old testament theology of priesthood, literally forever, meant that clergy were very rarely suspended or even stopped from active ministry and given second chances way beyond what the outside world would consider reasonable or safe.

No Women in Leadership

I've a lot of sympathy with the suggestion that if women had been involved in the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church that things would be very different. Sexual abuse and it's long term systematic cover up seems to be a very male problem.

So;- is the Roman Catholic Church to blame for the sexual abuse by it's clergy ? No the individuals are to blame, but Rome IS responsible for creating a culture in which the abuse festered, went unchecked and under reported. Even now Rome is in deep denial about the extent to which it actively contributed to this tragedy.

Don't Canonise John Paul II - It's a mistake & precedent you'll regret

2010-02-24T13:06:00.001Z

The Catholic News Agency (http://bit.ly/bgXVxt) quotes John Paul II personal secretary (now Archbishop of Krakow, Cardinal Stanislaw Dziwisz) as saying the process to the make the former Pope a saint is “is practically finished.”

I've already blogged on why I wouldn't commend him for sainthood (http://bit.ly/9Xdn8k) now I want to raise a second and perhaps more important objection:- we're missing the judgement of history

There are tried and tested reasons why the church has traditionally taken it's time in creating saints, one of them being; mature and wise judgement only comes with time and perspective.

The crowds at John Paul's funeral chanting 'Santo Subito' (literally saint now) were obviously high on emotion but that really shouldn't influence the process. Neither should the fact that John Paul's pontificate is so closely allied to the current pontiff. Is it right that one Pope should canonise his immediate predecessor, especially when he was the 'right hand man' ?

In contrast to the current rush to make saints; a waiting period of some 50 to 100 years gives an opportunity for history, time, maturity & wisdom to give their judgement on a persons life and spirituality. The shortened process just seems to be somewhat shallow.

I suspect the judgement of history will be that there was nothing spectacular about John Paul II pontificate; yes he was indeed the first Pope to use the media and travel but most of his encyclicals were backward looking and highly conservative. He led his church further into the ghetto of those pretending the modern world isn't happening. The really spectacular Pope of modern times is still in waiting, someone, like John 23rd, keeping their head down until elected, who will liberate the church from it's slavery to central control.

Time to decide ......

2010-02-21T06:07:00.002Z

So Monday 22nd February (tomorrow) is the feast of the Chair of St Peter and the day that those thinking of leaving the Anglican church for the Roman Catholic Church are going to declare their intentions, or not.

The reason I write 'or not' is that the 1st date proposed was Candlemass (2nd February), this then changed to the Chair of St Peter (22nd February), the nature of the date then changed from a day to declare intentions to a day of prayer. In short there has been a backtracking from a definite date to decide to a indefinite period of thinking about it.

Frankly, that's not good enough. By all means consider the matter carefully, take your time, but then make a decision. We can't go on like this indefinitely; a date must be set by which time you're either committed to the Anglican Church or leaving for Rome. Make up your mind.

And how many will actually leave ? I'm still predicting very few. The harsh economic reality of the entirely self financing, non stipendary, no accommodation, no church buildings, Ordinate, with the added smack of firm Roman government isn't a particularly attractive offer. Only those with the firmest of theological convictions that Rome is right for them will actually make the sacrifice, eventually. The rest will keep discussing the ordinate endlessly of which the end result will be 99.9% talk 0.1% action.

Associated blogs:-

Why I'm not going to Rome http://bit.ly/a1XV7C

The issue of property http://bit.ly/36BR33

A positive agenda for Anglo-Catholicism http://bit.ly/aW1Qbj

A counter offer http://bit.ly/acnKRn

Mary Co-Redemptrix : A dogma too far .....

2010-02-19T11:45:00.000Z

On the bottom shelf in the audio section, of Westminster Cathedral Bookshop lay un-purchased a set of audio cassettes entitled 'Mary Co-Redemptrix'. I was so intrigued by the title I did a little research:-

It is alleged that ancient authorities (Irenaeus & Aquinas) considered Mary's roll to be important or vital to the work of salvation. Without Mary there would be no salvation therefore she shares Christ's work of saving humanity. Her contribution is unequal to Christ's but important nevertheless. Therefore she is co-redemptrix. Elements of the Roman Catholic Church are campaigning to make this an official dogma, i.e. necessary to believe this for salvation.

The sheer audacity of this takes my breath away. On this basis Pontius Pilate and Judas are both co-redemptrix, after all the plan of salvation couldn't have happened without them and both of them obeyed God's will, didn't they?

There is also something deeper and darker here; this is a symptom of church adrift from any external source of authority, a church that believes itself to be the final authority, a church that barely nods in the direction of scripture, a church that is free to make up any new doctrine it fancies.

And what's next, Mary the 4th person of the trinity ? Make no mistake that's exactly where this kind of theology is heading.

Make the Pope Pay

2010-02-18T10:52:00.003Z

Some 20,000 people have signed a petition asking that the Roman Catholic Church pay for the Popes visit to the UK rather than the taxpayer. The estimated cost is £20 million pounds.

The petition is organised by the National Secular society and whilst I wouldn't normally support their initiatives, this one does have some merit;-

Can it be right that Anglicans, Methodists, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and people of no faith pay for the papal visit ? When leaders of other faith communities visit their followers surely the cost is met by the faithful of that religion ?

In the current financial climate, if we've got £20 million pounds to spare shouldn't we spend it on alleviating poverty, helping the unemployed back to work, or on schools and hospitals ?

I've got no problem with the Pope visiting his followers in the UK, I just think it shouldn't be funded by the taxpayer.

The actual words of the petition read:-

"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to ask the Catholic Church to pay for the proposed visit of the Pope to the UK and relieve the taxpayer of the estimated £20 million cost. We accept the right of the Pope to visit his followers in Britain, but public money would be better spent on hard-pressed schools, hospitals and social services which are facing cuts."

And you can find the petition here http://bit.ly/cozOCU

Synod will probably NOT vote for Women Bishops

2010-02-10T10:22:00.001Z

I'm going to go out on a limb here and predict, what I have come to believe, through talking to synod members, that the legislation enabling women to become Bishops in the Church of England will fail to be passed by General Synod later this year

Why ? Because the support of two particular groups is ebbing away from the legislation in it's currently proposed form;-

The first group are those who have come to feel that insufficient safeguards for those opposed to women bishops mean they can no longer support the legislation, see (http://bit.ly/avn1VA). This group contains some who formerly supported the legislation; given the narrow majority their change of mind is quite significant.

The second group are those for whom nothing but complete equality for women bishops is acceptable, i.e. absolutely no provision for those opposed. This group supported the legislation and in particular the 'code of practice' option, as a means of achieving their aim of complete (or near) equality / parity for women bishops. Now that they perceive that greater safeguards are likely (and they perceive these greater safeguards as great inequality) they would rather the legislation fell this time so that in ten years time they might back with a full majority and not have to compromise. In short they would rather wait ten years to get total parity then accept a compromise now.

Think about this for moment; - the real choice here is between a code of practice now or ten years of building sentiment until women bishops are authorised with absolutely no provision for those opposed. So the choice for those opposed is:- the code of practice, nothing or the Roman option.

Judge Cherie Booth QC

2010-02-05T14:49:00.002Z

So Cherie Blair QC, using her maiden name of Booth and judging one Shamso Miah for GBH; namely breaking a mans jaw with two punches over a dispute in a queue at the bank said ;-

“I am going to suspend this sentence for the period of two years based on the fact you are a religious person and have not been in trouble before... You are a religious man and you know this is not acceptable behaviour.”

Needless to say this has caused a lot of comment, not lease of all from those of no faith in particular who take offence at the idea they are more likely to offend / re-offend.

It occurs to me that the exact opposite of Judge Booth's conclusion can be justified;- If the offender, being of a religious conviction, actually committed GBH, then clearly his religion has had little effect on his actions and he is therefore more likely re-offend.

Anyway asides from that I'm thinking of putting a poster up in the local court offering a way to reduce possible sentences by attending church and making a suitable donation, or would that be reprobate?

Fr John Henry Newman - An Anglican

2010-02-05T10:49:00.003Z

No doubt when the Pope comes to the UK he will canonise Fr John Henry Newman. The media and even national focus will be on his conversion to Roman Catholicism. But let us not forget that Fr Newman was first and foremost an Anglican.

Fr Newman was an Anglican for half his life. Born in 1801 and ordained priest in 1825 at Christchurch Oxford, he was successively curate of St Clements Oxford, Vice Principal of St Alban Hall, tutor at Oriel College, preacher at Whitehall and Vicar of St Mary's Oxford. He was vicar of the St Mary's, the University church, for 14 years, a considerable period of time.

Newman effectively started the Oxford or Tractarian movement and contributed a considerable body of scholarly work before his conversion. He wrote the early tracts himself and Tract 1 entitled 'Thoughts on the Ministerial Commission' (http://bit.ly/dCYwd2) was a wake up call to many of the gentrified clergy of the day who had absolutely no idea of vocation or calling. Indeed the very roots of the concepts of priesthood, clergy and vocation, post the reformation in the Church of England, are to be found in Tract 1. Newman is effectively the Father of Anglo-Catholicism in the C of E. Indeed as the middle ground of the CofE today is broadly liberal-catholic you could argue that Newman is father of the whole modern Anglican church! Indeed modern clergy, their selection, training, formation and entire working / priestly life are the product of the working out of Tract 1.

In Tract 90, the last of the tracts (http://bit.ly/avjYIh), Newman tackles the 39 Articles of Religion, writing a catholic re- interpretation. The effect of the last tract was that Bishops begged him to write no more. His influence in his own generation, whilst an Anglican was immense, after his conversion he largely shunned by the former colleagues and the establishment.

Lastly it's worth noting that as a Roman Catholic he had a liberalising tendency upon the English Roman Catholic Church. He was not afraid to speak his mind as just as an example after the declaration of Papal Infallibility Newman wrote "I shall drink—to the Pope, if you please,—still, to Conscience first, and to the Pope afterwards." (Letter to the Duke of Norfolk, 1875)

1662 Prayer Book & Anglo-Catholic Interpretation

2010-02-04T14:40:00.002Z

Recently I started a 9.00am Mass on Sunday mornings for those who on any particular Sunday could not come to the main 10.30am Mass for whatever reason. Having a free choice of liturgies I opted for the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, arguably a somewhat unusual decision for an modern Anglo-Catholic, or perhaps not;-

I have long loved the beauty and poetry of Cranmer's English, his phrases and metaphors suffuse and pervade the English language even today. What I hadn't fully appreciated until recently, when I began to use the 1662 liturgy each Sunday, is how the words of the Prayer Book are open to a profoundly Anglo-Catholic interpretation.

The paradox of the prayer book 'giving notice' the 'exhortation to receive communion' and the 'exhortation before communion' is to suggest a quite high theology of the sacrament. In short the self examination and piety recommended in the prayer book wouldn't look at all out of place in a catholic devotional book; the same reverence for the sacrament is commended by both. If you haven't read any of the exhortations recently may I recommend them to you and quote from them;-

'For as the benefit is great, if with a true penitent heart and lively faith we receive that holy Sacrament'

It is said the principal objections to Catholic use of the prayer book are it's lack of an epiclesis, lack of a sacrificial theology of the mass and deficiency of intention;-

The epiclesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiclesis), for those who don't know, is the specific invocation of the Holy Spirit. Aside from the invocation of the Holy Spirit in the required exhortations the criticism is that the prayer book anaphora (eucharistic prayer) lacks a specific invocation of the spirit, the exact text is:-

'O merciful Father, we most humbly beseech thee; grant that we receiving these thy creatures of bread and wine, according to thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ’s holy institution, in remembrance of his death and passion, may be partakers of his most blessed body and blood'

Firstly I'd point out that whole of the anaphora is addressed to the Father and this part keeps that consistency. Secondly I'd point out that there is a clear invocation of the Father to ensure that communicants become 'partakers' of Jesus body and blood. If then the Spirit is the operative person of the Trinity, is not invoking the Father invoking the whole person of the Trinity, including the spirit?

In support I'd draw your attention to what the text is actually asking;- that God make the communicant part (partaker) of Christ's body. This is reinforced in the post communion prayer;-

'we are very members incorporate in the mystical Body of thy Son'

Surely there is a theology at work here of much more than a memorial meal, God is being invoked to effect a change in the sacrament and through the sacrament and to incorporate communicants in the body of Christ. I accept that the words 'in remembrance of his death and passion' allow an protestant interpretation, but surely that's the beauty & genius of this text, it's allows a catholic interpretation, equally and fully. It is not an afterthought or a reinterpretation, it was there from the beginning, it is fully intended and fully equal.

And so my purpose in celebrating the 1662 Mass is make Jesus present, and by receiving him in the sacrament to make myself and those who receive with me, members of the body of Christ. I believe the text allows that interpretation. Where is the defect of intention in that? I fully intend in my celebration what any catholic priest of the western rite intends, there is no defect in my intention.

As for a sacrificial theology, of course the 1662 text in suffused with sacrificial theology & language but not of the specific kind that intends the mass itself is a sacrifice. And yet I wonder about these words;-

'And although we be unworthy, through our manifold sins, to offer unto thee any sacrifice; yet we beseech thee to accept this our bounden duty and service'

Now I'm not so stupid as to fail to realise that much of the 1662 prayer book communion is specifically phrased to transfer the concept of the sacrifice of the mass into a sacrifice of 'praise and thanksgiving' and to specifically to highlight the absolute sufficiency of Christ's sacrifice, and I quote;-

'didst give thine only Son Jesus Christ to suffer death on the Cross for our redemption; who made there (by his one oblation of himself once offered) a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world'

And this is said to be reinforced by Article 31 (of the 39 Articles of Religion);-

'The Offering of Christ once made is that perfect redemption, propitiation, and satisfaction, for all the sins of the whole world, both original and actual; and there is none other satisfaction for sin, but that alone. Wherefore the sacrifices of Masses, in the which it was commonly said, that the Priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain or guilt, were blasphemous fables, and dangerous deceits.'

Now If you've never read the Oxford Movement's tracts in the original text then you've treat in store because Newman argues in Tract 90 (http://anglicanhistory.org/tracts/tract90/section9.html ) that what is really going on here is a criticism of the idea that the mass and Christ's sacrifice are separate. If they are not separate but one in the same, then sacrificial language to describe the mass is appropriate. Read the original and see what you think.

Whatever you make of that argument; I perceive that the 1662 prayer book is happy to allow priest and people a language of sacrifice, and specifically of gaining the benefits of Christ's sacrifice through the actions (sacrifice) of the mass;-

'mercifully to accept this our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving; most humbly beseeching thee to grant, that by the merits and death of thy Son Jesus Christ, and through faith in his blood, we and all thy whole Church may obtain remission of our sins, and all other benefits of his passion.'

So as an Anglo-Catholic I'm very happy to celebrate the 1662 mass, my intention is clear and consonate with the western rite, I invoke the Holy Spirit as a person of the trinity and make the sign of the cross over the elements at that point in the anaphora and I believe I make Christ present to those who receive him and in so doing I further the work of salvation.

In addition I recite the poetry of Cranmer and enjoy the resonance of phrases which continue to convey profound meaning with beauty, 350 years after they were written.

A visit to Westminster

2010-02-03T16:59:00.000Z

A visit to Westminster yesterday revealed that the date for deciding to swim the Tiber (or not) was moved to Monday 22nd February, namely the feast of the Chair of St Peter, very apt, needless to say I wasn't consulted. I also learnt that because General Synod won't have made a decision about provisions for dissenting clergy by 22nd Feb, some won't in fact decide on that date but wait to see what provision is eventually made. So my apologies for misleading you over the date, but an 'I told you so' with regard to the whole wretched matter dragging on and endlessly on .....

I also had a very interesting & disturbing conversation with a synod member who voted in favour of a code of practice last time (and remember it was a quite narrow victory) but is now persuaded to only vote in favour if more substantial safeguards are put in place for FiF et al. I wonder if anyone else has changed their minds in the meantime and I think like the Chinese curse that we live in 'interesting times'. I'm beginning to think there is a serious possibility that the legislation for women bishops might not get through the next vote and so be lost for a generation. That would be a terrible outcome, lets hope and work to ensure it doesn't happen.

'The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this Realm of England

2010-02-02T11:52:00.001Z

Perhaps it's time for us to be reminded that:- one of the primary reasons for the Reformation in continental Europe was to stop Papal interference in national politics. As the nation state emerges and comes into it's own it was considered just unacceptable that people in a given country should give a higher loyalty to the papacy. The papacy had a long history of political interference, sanctioning wars, fermenting internal rebellion, releasing subjects from their loyalty to the crown and inducing the assassination of heads of state (Papal Bull of 1570 Regnans in Excelsis). So it's hardly surprising that one of the key motivating factors which fuelled the reformation was the desire for political autonomy from Rome. Further I would argue that the very structure of Anglican Church and subsequently the Anglican Communion was deliberately decentralised, with autonomous diocese and provinces to avoid a re-run of problems created by a super-national & centralised church, i.e. Rome.

My response to news stories about the Pope and his criticisms of anti-discrimination legislation is to quote the Article of Religion Number 37 'The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this Realm of England' So I'll listen politely but I'm not really taking any notice.

Thousands leave the Church of England?

2010-02-01T17:57:00.001Z

Tomorrow is Candlemass, and it's the day set by those thinking of taking up the Popes offer to become Roman Catholics to have made their final decision. Will we see hundreds of clergy and thousands of laity leaving the CoE? No - I predict nothing will happen tomorrow and no one will declare their intentions. Why? because the offer isn't as attractive as it first appeared, no one will want to be first to refuse the offer, and so the foot shuffleing and threats to leave will continue ..... and go on and on and on ......

The Queen, The Pope and The Right to Discriminate

2010-02-01T17:19:00.005Z

So, as if there wasn't enough Roman Catholic triumphalism recently :- the English and Welsh Roman Catholic Bishops are in Rome on an 'ad limina' visit, the Pope has attacked proposed UK anti-discrimination legislation and according to Archbishop Vincent Nichols the Queen is 'extremely in favour' of the forthcoming Papal visit, see http://bit.ly/9JbjcR.

The Queen is 'extremely in favour' of Papal Visit

I very much doubt it;- It's an extremely unlikely sentiment for the head of the Church of England to express. There's been quite a bit of attributing various attitudes and comments to the Queen in recent months, almost all of them pro-Roman Catholic and Anti-Women Bishops. Of course almost anything can gossiped as being the opinion of the Queen because an official denial is just so unlikely. Frankly most of this is utter rubbish and patently designed to appeal a particular bred of English snob to whom the opinion of Mrs Saxe-Coburg-Gotha might matter.

Pope in favour of discrimination

We'll that's the logical headline! If we allow an exclusion for religion from anti-discrimination legislation then what is to stop the BNP declaring itself a religion? Or the Dutch Reformed Church (which supported apartheid) opening churches in the UK for white only members. Whilst the church wants the right not to be forced to employ homosexuals or allow adoptions by homosexual couples, what they don't seem to understand is that opens the flood gates for all sorts of other discrimination. If the church gets an exemption from the legislation, who else is entitled to one? (the photo is genuine, unfortunately)

Pope to visit Britain

Apparently the cost of the papal visit to the tax payer is going to £20 million, see http://bit.ly/d4ePcX Now I rarely agree with anything the National Secular Society says but on this occasion I like to say 'not in my name' and 'not with my taxes'. I don't mind if the pope comes and visits his followers, but they must pay for it.

More from Morocco ......

2010-01-14T00:11:00.000Z

Obviously I've been quite busy and sadly not had a lot of time to blog, apologies to everyone. If you're interested in the project to film the gospel readings please do visit:-

http://www.bigbookmedia.com/

I'm blogging the film shoot at

http://bigbookmedia.blogspot.com/

Jesus receives the cross

The way of he cross

Jesus walking with his disciples

Jesus enters Jerusalem on a donkey

Jesus on the cross

Golgotha

Buy video clips of Sunday Gospel readings, for teaching & preaching, for showing on data projector screens & TV's, for Bible Studies & Housegroups at http://www.bigbookmedia.com/

Imagery of Suffering and Mission

2010-01-09T03:04:00.000Z

I’m sitting in a café in down town Ouarzazate, having a cappuccino because we’ve all got the morning off - there is a night shoot tonight;- Jesus before the High Priest and Peter’s denial.

I’ve a reflection to write about based on Tuesday’s filming;-

I’m completely taken by surprise at the sheer horror of Jesus suffering. We read about these things and even see art depicting them, but it’s just on a whole different level to actually watch, even if it’s acted and not ‘real’. On Tuesday we filmed the soldiers mocking, beating and whipping Jesus and the crown of thorns. I knelt down to get a close still camera shot, just under the main film camera and having done that it wasn’t easy to move, for the whole of the scene, just in case I disturbed the actors or got in the shot. So I stayed put. I can honestly say it was one of the most emotionally uncomfortable few moments of my life, and certainly something I shall not forget, it can’t have been easy to act.

This is making me wonder about the rightful place of Jesus suffering in church life and our understanding of the incarnation. One of our local evangelical clergy greeted an ecumenical group, walking as an act of witness of Good Friday, with the words:- ‘Happy Easter, remember we’re the people of Easter and the resurrection, not the people of Good Friday and the crucifixion’ and of course that went down like a lead balloon with my catholic colleagues! But I’m wondering if he doesn’t have a point.

I can think of 3 reasons why we might tell the story of Jesus suffering;- firstly for those who are suffering themselves in the spirit of Hebrews 4.15 ‘we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathise’, secondly as the contrast in the story which ends in the triumph of the resurrection and thirdly as an indictment of humanity which perpetrates similar atrocities today.

Apart from that what is it that we’re proclaiming by focusing of Jesus suffering? What message is being conveyed by those suffering and bloody statues and images of Jesus so loved in Catholic countries? Is there (and I’m only asking the question) an obsession with Jesus suffering that’s at odds with the primacy of the resurrection? Surely the point isn’t just that he suffered but that he overcame.

I also wonder if by the constant use of these suffering images we don’t desensitise ourselves to the true horror of what happened. And if we create a sub-culture where images of a deeply suffering Jesus are normal or even unnoticed how accessible is that culture?

My church has a 12 foot crucifix which dominates the low 1950’s building from the moment you enter. What do the un-churched make of such of thing and how does it effect our mission? Is understanding that we live in a deeply isolated sub-culture of any help in mission and outreach or do we have to change to communicate the gospel more effectively?

Filming Holy Week

2010-01-09T02:23:00.001Z

To give you an idea of just what it is that I've been up to this week, these are some of my pictures from the Big Book Media Shoot so far;-

Pilate

Soldiers spears

Jesus brought before Pilate

Jesus & the crowd

Jesus with Pilate

Herod tries Jesus

Jesus mocked by Herod

Roman guards beat Jesus

Pilate questions Jesus

Jesus beaten by the Roman guards

Just a view of the mountains in Morocco

Judas and the Temple priests

A Temple Guard

Jesus cleanses the Temple

Jesus overturn the tables of the money changers in the Temple

Sacrificial doves escape at the Temple

Render unto Caesar

Two young people listen to Jesus teach in the Temple

Jesus Teaching in the Temple

To purchase video film clips of the Sunday lectionary Gospel reading visit;-
http://www.bigbookmedia.com/

On location in Morocco

2010-01-04T23:30:00.001Z

I'm on location for the next 12 days in Morocco with Big Book Media (a film company) and we're making short films of the Sunday lectionary Gospel readings. This trip we're filming Palm Sunday through to the Resurrection. I'm the on set theological consultant. As I'm going to be watching the drama of Holy Week unfold I thought I'd blog my reflections. If you get something out of them that's great, otherwise just browse on …

Today we've been shooting Jesus brought before Pilate and the crowd baying for blood. Although it's a scene most know well: I wonder if you've ever really connected with the emotion of the event? I ask that because as I have been watching I'm really struck by just how frightening a crowd can be if you're just one person.

Jesus dragged before Pilate seems a vulnerable figure; he appears to have no control over events, even less his own destiny.

I watched a group of people, those playing the crowd, start out acting and gently jostling and harassing Jesus turn into a lynch mob, actually striking the actor with hatred on their faces, and suddenly I was no longer sure they were acting. It's a sad indictment of humanity that individuals can be so easily manipulated and so easily abdicate their moral responsibility to the crowd.

I'm also sure from having watched and felt the scene unfold that Jesus could easily have reacted in a very different way and perhaps even have escaped an execution. His reactions are just bewildering unless you conclude that he had a strong sense of purpose.

Ironically Jesus strong sense of purpose makes the vulnerable person the only truly free person in the whole drama. Perhaps there's a spiritual lesson here;- Power gives the illusion of freedom, purpose empowers the powerless.

Should you be in church or at a party on New Years Eve ?

2009-12-31T07:15:00.003Z

Every year about this time I have roughly the same discussion with someone and it runs along these lines ;-

Q  What time is the watch night service father?

A  I've never held one because New Years Eve isn't a Christian Festival, my advice is not to be in church at midnight but to enjoy the company of your friends and perhaps find a good party.

R  In Nigeria (or wherever) everyone goes to church on New Years Eve and it's is packed; it's one of the most important services of the year!

So am I doing the right thing ?

Party?
My attitude is influenced by an incarnational theology that says life is more than being in church and should be enjoyed to the full (John 10.10), which includes a good party and that there is nothing wrong with alcohol in moderation or enjoying yourself. Should the churches only response to everything be to hold a service? Isn't that a bit like the episode of Father Ted where the only conceivable response to a crisis was to say mass! Jesus went the party at Cana, and provided the wine!

Church?
On the other hand if most of my congregation are at home on their own because they were used to being in church at midnight should I accommodate that? Should we (Christians / & the Church) be reclaiming New Years Eve from a hedonist society and asserting that it's should be a time of praying for and dedicating to God the coming new year?

Church Party?
Alternatively should I have organised a church party? Or is that the worst of all solutions? If church is a key or possibly the only social connection between people, in a quite fragmented society, isn't it natural that the church should organise the party? I seem to remember as a curate there was a good New Years Eve party organised in the church hall, it was an entirely social event, but worked because the church was a community. I also seem to remember the delivery of many cases of Babycham: you don't see that much these days!

Sharia and Monsoon

2009-12-30T12:07:00.003Z

It was my day off on Monday and I went shopping with Mrs Augustine of Canterbury at the Brent Cross Shopping Centre. I was amused, whilst Mrs Augustine tried on a dress in the changing room, to observe a number of Muslim women, dressed in black with heads covered, examining brightly coloured clothes and lacy underwear. I wondered why they might purchase such clothes if they are never seen: but Mrs Augustine later informed me that this is for their husbands.

This set me wondering where one might purchase shapeless black clothing : you never see a shop for it, and if there's much profit in that kind of thing.

Perhaps more interestingly I also wondered if making women wear this clothing wasn't the moral equivalent of blaming the victim!

I would have thought that if there was a problem with men's behaviour: namely sexually harassing women, then the answer would be to address the men's offending behaviour not the victims. It also seems to me that the tactic of dressing women thus is not very effective: because if you've ever been to an Islamic country you'll know that sexual harassment is endemic and a constant problem for women travellers.

Clearly the patriarchal solution is to blame the victim for being too attractive and alluring, on the basis that men can't help themselves, and to require a head to toe covering.

Wouldn't a better solution be educating men that this behaviour is unacceptable and punishing offenders?

Apostolic Succession: an Anglo-Catholic Fetish

2009-12-29T16:46:00.003Z

It's an appealing, comforting, affirming and rather romantic idea that the hands laid on my head at ordination go back in an unbroken line, over the centuries, to St Peter himself. But does it really have any meaning or consequence?

Clearly apostolic succession is not the transmission of a magical power by successive touch, rather it's the authorisation to perform an office within the context of assent to the belief, doctrine and order and of a / the church. (I think I'd want to add something here about the church calling suitably gifted people who are able themselves to confirm that call)

So the succession by just itself isn't a guarantee of anything.

Interestingly in Buddhism a form of succession operates that seeks to validate teaching as being consonate with that of the Buddha by tracing the linage of a teacher back to point of origin considered authentic.

It's a somewhat embarrassing contrast that Buddhists should be interested in the authenticity & truthfulness of teaching whilst certain Christians appear interested in a form of magical touch.

Surely it would be better for us as Christians to locate authorisation for ministry and authenticity of teaching by consonance with scripture or the consensus of the faithful (sensus fidelium).

Having said that I wouldn't like to abandon the concept of the Apostolic Succession, I just don't believe it has any value outside the context of a catholic church, an individuals assent to an authentic faith and an ability to perform a ministry.

In short;- the point I'm seeking to make is if there were a break in the physical line of succession, a missing link, that would NOT invalidate any subsequent line of ministry. Ministry is validated by the touch of God's hand and not limited by human institutions and rules.

With regard to Apostolicae Curae (1896) it's a flawed document that refuses to acknowledge the errors of the Roman Catholic Church that led to the reformation. It just completely fails to understand that the Anglican Church is Catholic of it's own right and requires no validation from the Bishop of Rome. Sadly neglected these days is Saepius Officio, the Anglican Churches reply, stating that Anglican ordinations are consonate with scripture and that the Church of England has retained, through the prayer book, a Catholic character and liturgy.

One last interesting note about the self contradictory attitudes of Rome is the conditional ordination of Dr Graham Leonard on the grounds that he may have received a valid ordination in the Anglican Church. Since the 1930's Old Catholic Bishops (The Old Catholic Church separated from Rome in the 1870's) have been co-consecrators at Anglican Bishops consecrations and from 1969 onwards ALL Anglican Bishops (re)-acquired a valid (according to Rome) apostolic succession. So by their own somewhat strange logic I'm as validly ordained as the Pope!

Poor Joseph Cartoon - I'm not offended

2009-12-18T13:19:00.000Z

The world it seems is offended by this cartoon, or the least the blogging world. Really ? I thought it amusing if a little disrespectful. But then again I'm not required to believe that Mary remained a virgin after the birth of Jesus, that she was born immaculate or that she was assumed bodily into heaven. Indeed most of the preceding Roman dogmas strike me as unlikely and having no basis in scripture. Interestingly they are also very widely regarded with scepticism amongst the RC laity I know.

Would it be so outrageous if Mary went on the have half a dozen children with Joseph, the man she grew to love? the brothers and sisters of Jesus mentioned in the gospels?

Would it be so outrageous if Mary died and was buried in Ephesus, where she had lived out her final years, and that she was not bodily assumed into heaven?

Would it be so outrageous if Mary wasn't perfect and born without original sin, but was like the rest of us, fully human?

I think these dogmas are dreamed up by theologians with little connection to the ordinary world and a very slender grasp of reality (and scripture), and that would be fine IF they didn't then go on to say that believing them was necessary for salvation. Marian dogmas are not necessary for salvation, that's the absolute and sole prerogative of faith in Jesus Christ.

Saint John Paul II - Just say NO

2009-12-18T11:25:00.000Z

With all the fuss and hype surrounding the funeral of Pope John Paul II it hardly seemed right to have any reservations about him being made a saint, and yet even as I watched the funeral on television I was thinking about those who suffered as a result of his pontificate. Several years later I see that the cause to make him a saint is nearing the end of the process. Well I won't be including him in any litanies and I'll tell you why;-

John Paul II allowed and even affirmed the teaching on contraception that condemns hundreds of thousands to die of Aids in the developing world. The argument that abstinence is the answer would be amusing if it wasn't also a deadly matter. Add to that the woman condemned to a life of child bearing without a break, many of whom die as a consequence of the mixture of inadequate nutrition and the physical toll of repeated pregnancy. People in the west have forgotten that women here used to die from repeated pregnancy and we take family planning for granted. Just image a world where people like JP II had their way.

Then there are those women in the Roman Catholic church who feel called to Priestly or even Episcopal ministry. A topic that John Paul II declared closed. How can you refuse to even discuss a subject that people care passionately about ?

I'm sorry, I'm not going to let sentimentality get the better of me; sad though John Paul II death was from Parkinson's it doesn't excuse his record as Pope. He increased the sum of human suffering and for me that outweighs any good he might have done. The man was not a saint.

Turning the hearts of the disobedient to the wisdom of the just

2009-12-17T13:19:00.003Z

For many years I've used the Roman Catholic Daily Missal for celebrating the daily Mass. It's a massively convenient all-in-one book that contains everything a modern catholic needs to say mass. Immediately following the Anglicanorum Coetibus farce I was so annoyed that I started blogging and stopped using the Roman Missal !

I now use the Anglican Daily Eucharistic Lectionary book. This is hugely inconvenient, there are no introductory sentence (I use a verse from the daily psalm), some generic Alleluias are printed in the back but are inconvenient to find, there are no offertory prayers (I've got my own little collection). So all in all it's quite a sacrifice / nuisance just to stick my finger up at the pope, but perhaps it's worth it!

On the upside;- the readings are from the NRSV, which has inclusive language and is a great improvement because there were some days according to the Roman Missal when, I swear, that only men could be saved ! The collects are a million percent better and that brings me to the point;-

Have you carefully read the collect for the 3rd Sunday of Advent?

O Lord Jesus Christ,
who at your first coming sent your messenger
to prepare your way before you:
grant that the ministers and stewards of your mysteries
may likewise so prepare and make ready your way
by turning the hearts of the disobedient to the wisdom of the just,
that at your second coming to judge the world
we may be found an acceptable people in your sight;
for you are alive and reign with the Father
in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, now and for ever.

It put me in mind of that sentence in the ordinal:- 'They are to be messengers, watchmen and stewards of the Lord; they are to teach and to admonish'

Now I'm wondering to what extent I am responsible for the salvation of those in my cure (pastoral care) ? Western society is predicated on individualism and personal freedom so the idea that someone else might bear any kind of responsibility for the individual, especially on a religious matter (an area generally consider to be an intensely private) is dangerously counter cultural. Indeed the idea of responsibility towards others / the community has been out of favour since the second world war.

As an aside one might ask why the post war generation took such a sharply individualistic stance? Perhaps it contrasts the duty to King & Country that motivated men in the 14-18 war and the enforced communalism of the 38-45 war. Whatever the reason, the last century started with a strong ethic of communalism and ended with rampant individualism, perhaps best symbolised by the rise and fall of the Soviet Union. I digress...

So I wonder how we actual 'admonish' people & 'turn the hearts of the disobedient' in the modern age ? I suspect that most clergy are much more at ease being affirming and encouraging than they are being critical and challenging. But I think we desperately need to be challenged and criticised in an age where some adults are little better than 2 year old children having a tantrum because they can't get their way and have completely failed to appreciate the competing needs of others.

And what about those whole churches who fail to have any sort of social responsibility or outreach into the community, whose religion is entirely private ? Or those churches fail to contribute to the needs of others by either not paying or underpaying the common fund / diocesan quota ? Are these all matters about which we should remain silent?

I hope not. I think we need to recover one of the roles of priest as prophet; the voice that calls people to a better life, that challenges and criticises and exhorts people to individual & corporate repentance / change.

And surely there must be some limits on behaviour? We've probably all witnessed the kind of unchristian behaviour that has made us think;- I wish that person didn't come to church ! Is there a point where it's right to tell someone not to come to church anymore? Is there a point where a person's damage to the community outweighs their right to membership? I'm aware of the various prohibitions on ex-communication, but I'm also aware of churches that operate a discipline where people are asked not to receive communion.

And what of biblical models of discipline in the Christian Community, I don't think this is in the lectionary, but perhaps it ought to be:-

Matthew 18.15 ‘If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one. 16But if you are not listened to, take one or two others along with you, so that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax-collector. NRSV

Anglo-Papalist or Anglo-Catholic

2009-12-11T14:57:00.001Z

In any debate it's important to define the terms. Often in the definition lies the root of the disagreement and occasionally the seeds of a solution. My definitions include:-

Ecumenism for Uniformity
Those seeking a unified world wide church, a central source of authority (preferably the Pope), clear authoritative teaching, unified liturgical practice and clear boundaries of doctrine and membership. This group has some difficulty admitting the existence of any other kind of ecumenism.

Ecumenism for Diversity
Those seeking to better understand other churches, value and retain their distinctive traditions and differences. Those working for closer union, even communion whilst retaining a distinctive theological perspective or even distinctive ecclesiologies. This group are not seeking a unified world wide church; a project they view with some suspicion.

Anglo-Papalists
This group whilst nominally Anglican looks to Rome for their teaching and inspiration. But more than that they look to Rome for their very raison d'être and long to be reunited with the Roman Catholic Church. They regret the reformation and see little good as have emerged from the reformed strand of Christianity.

Anglo-Catholics
This group also looks to Rome for inspiration and liturgical practice but also values the distinctive Anglican patrimony, the catholic part of the Anglican church from the reformation to the present day. They also believe that the Anglican church is authentically Catholic without union with Rome, in that it is universal in England, retains the catholic order of Bishops, Priests and Deacons, and that Anglican liturgy leaves sufficient space / leeway for catholic interpretation.

So what use are these definitions ? One immediate use is to ask how group membership overlaps ? for example;-

Almost all 'Anglo-Papalists' will believe in 'Ecumenism for Uniformity'

'Anglo-Catholics' will believe in either 'Ecumenism for Uniformity' or 'Ecumenism for Diversity'

Another use would be addressing particular groups, which by co-incidence is the very point of this post;-

'Anglo-Catholics' believing in 'Ecumenism for Uniformity'
If this is the group that you're inclined towards, an important moment of choice has arrived! The 'Anglo-Papalists' who believe in 'Ecumenism for Uniformity' ought to be off to Rome some time in the new year. Will you be with them ? If not then I'd encourage you for the sake of your sanity to embrace 'Ecumenism for Diversity' wholeheartedly. Given the Pope's offer I'm expecting 'Ecumenism for Uniformity' to be in sharp and marked decline in the CofE in the coming year.

Just for Fun; Bad Vestments

2009-12-09T14:31:00.000Z

I acknowledge that I got these pictures from http://bit.ly/7ewcsv

ECUSA are just Anglicans

2009-12-09T11:40:00.001Z

The Saint Barnabas' Blog refers to the 'latest inflammatory decision of the wilfully disobedient Episcopal Church of America' You can read the original at http://bit.ly/4MqRUO.

I'm not sure this is true and I'll tell you why;-

Each province of the Anglican Communion is autonomous. There aren't any rules for membership of the Anglican Communion and no one can order a province to do anything. Within a province the Diocese is also autonomous and likewise there isn't any route for enforcing anything. That's why the Archbishop of Canterbury is head of the communion but doesn't have any actual power, all he can do is try to influence & persuade a Diocese or Province. This isn't peculiar to the Anglican Communion it's also the structure (or lack thereof) of the Church of England. It's a structure deliberately made to resist religious persecution, intolerance and the tyranny of majority rule. It's a structure that deliberately breads diversity and is the antithesis of homogeneity.

Then you need to consider the huge size of the USA and it's relatively inward focused and independent minded ethos. Less than 10% of the population have ever travelled outside the USA, there is little foreign news coverage, it's a country with it's own paper sizes; which tells you a lot the mind set. It's also a country that values independence and fought us hard to get it. It's a country that by inclination would rather lead than follow and one for whom keeping the consensus wouldn't be as important as doing what was right.

In addition the Episcopal Church of the USA has long & fully accepted the ministry of gay, lesbian and transgender clergy. Many gay ECUSA clergy have served the church loyally and are excellent candidates for the office of Bishop.

Put these things together a different picture emerges;- ECUSA is not 'wilfully disobedient' because there is no central authority to be disobey. It is indeed acting against the majority view of the Anglican Communion; but the very structure of the Communion allows it to do that. The fact that parts of he communion ordain women and parts do not is evidence of a structure that allows diversity. Add to this the mind set of the USA and you have a church (the Episcopal Church of the USA) that fully understands that Nigeria and Uganda don't want gay clergy or Bishops but nevertheless think it is right to elect a gay Bishop. The Anglican Communion has no veto or structure to stop them. If Nigeria, et al, as a consequence want to leave or set up a tighter and more homogeneous church , that's up to them, it is also profoundly un-Anglican.

Uganda and the Election of Canon Mary Glasspool

2009-12-07T04:32:00.002Z

Let me contrast for you the reaction of the Anglican Church to two different pieces of news;-

Canon Mary Glasspool is elected a Suffragan Bishop of Los Angles Diocese. She is in a long term committed relationship with another woman. Almost immediately the Archbishop of Canterbury issues a statement, Anglican Mainstream are 'saddened', the church related media will discuss the story endlessly until eventually and perhaps inevitably the Episcopal Church of the USA will end up outside what's left of the Anglican Communion.

The second piece of news is that a law is making it's way through the legislature of Uganda which further criminalises homosexuality; 3 years in jail for failing to report homosexuals to the authorities and the death penalty for 'aggravated' homosexuality. The Church of Uganda is almost silent (with the brave exception of Canon Gideon Byamugisha who described the new law as state-legislated genocide), and there are no statements from either of our Archbishops, one of whom was actually born in Uganda.

Can no one in the church see the shocking and disgraceful parallel here.

I'm aware that the Rowan Williams has apparently made efforts behind the scenes to influence Ugandan Church and State on the basis that he is advised that a public campaign may have the opposite effect. But is that really good enough ?

And what's more it's the same people who've been silent about Uganda (would it be too wicked to suggest that's because they secretly agree with it?) who will now be outraged by the election of Canon Mary Glasspool.

Image just for a moment that you're a gay Christian, how would you feel ? Prominent church figures refuse to condemn state sponsored oppression and violence, but immediately speak out against the election of a Bishop, freely chosen by her own church. Some people actually appear to believe that it's preferable to put homosexuals in prison and kill them, than have them elected a Bishop - make no mistake that's the deeply unpalatable truth revealed by different reactions to two pieces of news.

Today, frankly, I'm ashamed to be a member of the Church of England.

Human Sexuality alla Romana

2009-12-03T14:01:00.001Z

Whilst some of us in the Anglican Church feel uncomfortable with the official teaching on human sexuality, believe me it's nothing compared with this;-

Gays and transsexuals won't go to heaven, a top Roman Catholic cardinal said Wednesday.

"Transsexuals and gays will never enter the heavenly kingdom," said Javier Lozano Barragan, until recently the Vatican's 'health minister'.

"It's not me who says so, it's St Paul," he said, referring to the saint credited with forging the early Church.

Barragan, who still holds positions on various Church bodies, added that people were not born gay but became so.

"Perhaps they aren't guilty but by acting against the dignity of the body they will certainly not enter the Kingdom of Heaven," he repeated.

Clergy Pay and Conditions

2009-12-02T17:36:00.001Z

According to Ruth Gledhill;-
A great incentive to become a vicar these days must be the pension at the end of the 'career'. As a covenanting Anglican, I do wonder why stipendiary can't contribute to their contributory pension scheme as everyone else in the country has to, especially as most people don't even enjoy fixed benefit schemes any more, again unlike the clergy, who also don't have to pay community charge. (you can read the original here http://bit.ly/7AIhpR)

Great ! Wonderful ! I work for considerably less than the average UK salary, put in many more hours than the average UK worker, I actually care about my work, and when I retire with 25 years service I will get £7000 pa, which is £134 a week. I think you only get the full pension if you work 38 years.

Can you tell me where I'm going to rent a house and live for £134 a week ?

The basic facts are that I earn 20k and get a free accommodation. The average UK salary is 24K (source; BBC) and so I guess that I earn around the average.

However unlike the average worker I have two degrees and spent seven years training and studying for ministry. Unlike the average worker I work around 60 hours a week and am not entitled to any kind of overtime. Unlike the average worker I have no employment protection in law.

I could walk out of here tomorrow and earn 50k a year, as could many clergy. What keeps me here? The fact I actually want to do the job and think it's important.

Is that any reason to exploit me even further; with worse pay & conditions?

The Authority to Ordain Women

2009-11-30T12:18:00.003Z

One of the arguments used to oppose the ordination of women is that the Church of England does not have the authority to make this kind of change to the ministry of the church. Some even assert that nothing less than an ecumenical council would have such authority.

Clearly if those kind of statements were made by a Cardinal in Rome, or Eastern Orthodox Bishop you could at least understand where they were coming from. But to hear these words come from a Anglican exposes a very serious logical inconsistency;-

The very existence of the Church of England bears testimony to the right of Churches to behave in an autonomous manner. The idea that changes can only be agreed by a world wide council would mean that almost no change could ever be made. Every church (Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant etc) acts and makes changes without an Ecumenical Council. The last Ecumenical Council was in 787AD and plenty has changed since then.

If you admit that changes can be made without an Ecumenical Council then the only basis to deny the right of the Anglican Church to make changes would be it's lack of communion with Rome. The Church if England already asserts it's right to act autonomously from Rome in it's very existence.

Every ordained member of the Church of England assents to the 39 Articles of Religion;

Article 20 Of the Authority of the Church

The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and authority in Controversies of Faith: and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God's Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another. Wherefore, although the Church be a witness and a keeper of Holy Writ, yet, as it ought not to decree any thing against the same, so besides the same ought it not to enforce any thing to be believed for necessity of Salvation.

The Church of England has the right to ordain women, deacon, priest and bishop and it derives that right from it's very foundation. To deny this right is to deny the very foundation of the Church of England.

Back to Church Sunday (Church Mouse is SO right!

2009-11-28T13:43:00.002Z

Church Mouse says about Back to Church Sunday 'there is no point inviting people back if you haven't dealt with the reasons why they left in the first place' you can read it here http://bit.ly/4ERC3n

This is SO true and I really can't understand why people don't get this; if church is boring, dull, unfriendly and cold, you can invite people to give it a second chance, but they'll just leave again. What's worse is that you only get one 2nd chance; when people have seen it for themselves recently no amount of invites, initiatives or marketing will get them back.

When I lived in Cambridge there was a restaurant which opened and it was absolutely packed for the first 3 weeks. Then it was totally empty. What happened ? The restaurant opened before it was ready, the staff weren't trained properly , the kitchen wasn't ready for a full restaurant, the food took ages to come and standards got worse the more customers came for dinner. Two months, and an expensive marketing campaign later the restaurant closed. What's the lesson here;- don't invited people to something that isn't ready or worth attending. And;- no amount of marketing will make up for the fact that people tried the restaurant and didn't like it.

In marketing everyone is taught that 'no amount advertising will make people buy a product they don't want'

The church does not need more marketing it needs to change the product (that's the experience of going to church NOT the message of the gospel). It needs to make going to church and church membership an experience that people actually want .... not something they do begrudgingly out of guilt, superstition, habit or half inherited loyalties.

What's the recipe for good 'going to church' experience? It's not brain surgery to work it out;- a bright welcoming lobby with a personal welcome, a welcome pack, a comfortable seat, friendly church members, a physically warm building, a well presented and printed service booklet, lessons that are well read with inflection and emphasis , really great music and good singing, a good sound system so that everyone can hear clearly, an informative, provoking, and moving sermon, relevant intercessions, beautiful liturgy and profound symbolism, someone to talk to afterwards with fresh coffee and an invitation to attend again.

I'd also add to that recipe a data projector screen and professional quality audio visual aids such as those at http://www.bigbookmedia.com/ (you'll just have to forgive the blatant plug for a project I've been involved with)

Dublin Abuse Report and the Catholic Herald

2009-11-27T16:56:00.004Z

The report from the investigation into the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin is a truly shocking read. One priest abused over 100 children, 46 priests were investigated in the report. What is perhaps even more shocking is that all of this was hushed up by the Irish state and Roman Catholic Church who were more interested in the reputation of the church than justice for the victims. Indeed it would appear that the authoritarian structure of Irish Roman Catholic Church meant that the abuse was kept out of the public eye for many years.

The lesson to be learnt;- authoritarian structures like to keep problems, failures and abuses quiet because they don't like to face tough questions from outside. Authoritarian structures just can't handle internal or external criticism. Open structures tend to keep the discipline of explaining to the wider world their problems and failures and are less likely to hide abuse. Authorities structures can look good but be rotten underneath; open structures can look chaotic but are hiding nothing, what you see is what you get.

Let those with ears to hear understand .........

And talking of keeping quiet;- the Dublin Abuse report is a major piece of international news, a major church news story and yet Damian Thompson has tweeted on every other subject today except Dublin and the Catholic Herald silent on the issue. Apparently it's fine to heavily criticise Rowan Williams and the Church of England, at length on every possible occasion and it's fine to report every small piece of non-news from Rome in triumphalist terms, but when it comes to admitting that everything isn't perfect in the Roman Catholic Church they have absolutely nothing to say. (Note;- see the comments)

Civil Religion ?

2009-11-25T11:02:00.001Z

Today I'm struck by the truth articulated by Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco that 'Christianity rejects and will always reject being reduced to a civil religion at the service of those in power, whoever they may be' you can read the full article here http://bit.ly/871Lez

Engagement with the local community, being a school governor, running a worthy local project, teaching ethics, being at the youth club, being a local councillor, all these may well be good things for a priest to do but they must not be all that s/he does.

The church is more, much more that just another local voluntary agency. We forget this at our peril.

Our primary task is to build and maintain the church; mission must be at the heart of all we do. Serving the local community is the consequence of our faith and convictions, it must not become an idol we serve in place of Christ.

And if the consequence of this is that we say something society finds hard or unacceptable, well that is the cost of our involvement. Sometimes we're called to speak truth to power, even if what we say is unpopular.

Forward in Faith

2009-11-24T13:47:00.001Z

There is an element of truth that lies behind this comment by Edward Tomlinson, his blog is at; http://bit.ly/4QXhL9

'Father Waller’s board (vandalised) expresses what many of us are starting to fear- that we are actually hated within our own family, who have no real desire to help us, but will seek to hurt us if we stay and hurt us if we go. Pray God that this fear is entirely unfounded'

And the truth revealed is this;- since 1992 those who opposed the ordination of women have seriously offended many people and done little or nothing to help themselves.

The surprise they now express that people have limited sympathy for them is in sharp contrast to the 15 years of offensive remarks and apartheid attitudes suffered by those who don't agree with Forward in Faith. Many of my colleagues have been treated like leapers by Forward in Faith and told they're not 'real' catholics. Members of Forward in Faith don't attend chapters regularly, don't join in area and diocesan events and in some cases don't even talk to clergy who disagree with them. For some of us it's been like living in an apartheid state; Forward in Faith members have shown very little respect or courtesy to women clergy & male colleagues. Some behaviour has been disgracefully unchristian and some people have been serious hurt by offensive remarks and behaviour.

My advice to Forward in Faith is; start making a few friends, apologise to those you've offended, commit yourselves wholeheartedly to coming to chapter, deanery synod and taking a full part in all aspects of Anglican church life. Treat those with whom you disagree with respect and courtesy. In consequence you might find people more kindly disposed towards you.

Debate not vandalism

2009-11-23T12:33:00.002Z

Lets encourage reasoned debate not vandalism

Wash and Go

2009-11-23T12:07:00.001Z

Ancient Richborough (read him here http://bit.ly/5EjDfe) says in his most recent blog that the CofE should 'start preparing the financial package which will enable priests to move on as quickly as possible'

Surely those who stayed on after 1992 (when financial compensation was offered) can not now expect compensation ? If you couldn't serve in a church with women in leadership and ministry surely the time to leave with compensation was around 1994.

In the FiF alternative reality those who now want to leave will get financial compensation, continue to live in their Anglican vicarages and continue to worship in their Anglican churches.

In the real world this is utterly unacceptable. People in many parishes are giving sacrificially to support the work and mission of the Church of England and the idea that their money can used be used to subsidise new parishes for Rome just can not be right.

No compensation, no use of Anglican vicarages or churches. Have the courage of your convictions, simply resign and go ....

Rowan's Pectoral Cross from the Pope

2009-11-23T11:01:00.001Z

I'm grateful to David Hamid, his blog here;- http://bit.ly/4nuGe3. He pointed out that Benedict gave Rowan Williams a gold pectoral cross as a gift at their recent meeting. How interesting that the Roman Pontiff should give the insignia of a Bishop to a dubiously baptised layman ! Perhaps Benedict doesn't think Anglican orders are null and void ..... that would be an interesting place to begin an ecumenical dialogue ........

Pope John Paul II would whip himself before he ordained priests

2009-11-23T10:36:00.002Z

In an article entitled 'Pope John Paul would whip himself before he ordained priests' which you can read here:- http://bit.ly/7kWzQ2 the following testimonies are cited from the Congregation for the Causes of Saints:-

'Among them is the testimony of Polish nun Tobiana Sobodka, of the Sacred Heart of Jesus order, who worked for Pope John Paul in his private Vatican apartments and at his summer residence in Castel Gandolfo near Rome. Sister Sobodka said: 'Several times he (Pope John Paul) would put himself through bodily penance. 'We would hear it - we were in the next room at Castel Gandolfo. You could hear the sound of the blows when he flagellated himself. He did it when he was still capable of moving on his own.'

'The flagellation is also confirmed by another bishop who has given testimony Emery Kabongo, who for several years was a secretary for Pope John Paul. He said: 'He would punish himself and in particular just before he ordained bishops and priests. Before passing on the sacraments he wanted to prepare himself.'

Is this the kind of thing a church leader should be doing ? Is this the kind of thing that we might wish to model for our church leaders ? Is this a sign of mental health and well being ? Is this a virtue ? Would God wish us to do this ?

No doubt you'll make up your own mind about this, as for me I would have very serious problems working for a church where this occurred let alone discovering this was practised by it's leader. I think this reveals self loathing, a dislike or hatred for humanity and dislike or hatred of the physical body. This is not a picture of mental wholeness and well being, it's the opposite.

No greener grass

2009-11-14T11:54:00.003Z

In the last week I've made a note of those stories that show that the Roman Catholic church faces the same issues as the Anglican Church. Those who want to go to Rome because they perceive it problem / dissent / liberal free should read:-

Gay Catholic Priest Getting Married
http://bit.ly/218Xh5
Catholic Priest a Secret Father
http://bit.ly/3aXjdP
Catholic Prelate in Property Scandal with Gangsters
http://bit.ly/34t6af
Catholic Church Corruption Story
http://bit.ly/3FUDfk
SSPX Bishop to go on trial in Britain
http://bit.ly/3xnJ3j
Hope for priests who would marry
http://bit.ly/4lNOmo
Middleborough Diocese faces £8m Child Abuse Bill
http://bit.ly/q03kE

.... and they might also like to contemplate that the vast majority of Roman Catholics I know; actively want women priests, marriage for clergy and an end to the teaching on contraception. There is no haven for those who can't live the modern world ....

Bishop Tom Butler provides clear leadership ....

2009-11-13T15:33:00.005Z

'But no Priest or group of laity has the right to take church property with them when they change denominations, for a Diocese holds such property in trust for the mission and ministry of the Church of England to all the people of its parishes and this duty of care would continue.

I don't myself see how a parish could legally "take" the parish church and other assets without specific statutory authority. In the case of the parish church, it would presumably mean a Scheme under the Pastoral Measure or specific legislation enacted for the purpose, and this could only be done with the goodwill of the diocese. In the case of assets such as the church hall or other parish property, appropriation to another denomination would almost certainly be a breach of trust and would not be possible without the co-operation of the Diocesan Board of Finance as Custodian Trustees and probably also the involvement of the Charity Commission. Parsonage houses are, of course, governed by the Parsonages Measure and an Incumbent cannot alienate the parsonage without obtaining the authority required by law, again the Diocesan Board of Finance or the Church Commissioners. Of course in the months and years ahead much of this might well be crawled over by lawyers on all sides, but the general principles seem to be clear and we can all relax a little whilst the plot thickens. My own feeling is that the Vatican’s initiative is more aimed at ex-Anglicans in the United States than members of the Church of England but no doubt some of our people will wish to give it serious consideration.'

The Rt Rev. Dr Tom Butler, Bishop of Southwark

http://bit.ly/3tuZLu

A Counter Offer

2009-11-12T16:28:00.000Z

Augustine of Canterbury extends a very warm and generous welcome to Roman Catholics who would like to come home to the mother church of our country. Roman Catholic Clergy are especially welcome and the benefits they can expect are:-

Freedom of Thought

Anglican clergy make up their own minds on theological and moral issues using scripture, tradition and reason as sources of authority. Freed from the magisterium, imprimatur, catechesis, dogmas and the 'Holy Office' you are simply asked to consent to the Catholic Creeds.

Freedom of Expression

Many Anglican clergy speak their minds without fear. It's perhaps a bit bewildering if you come from a closely controlled organisation, but it's one of the great & historic glories of the C of E.

Decentralised Authority

Authority in genuinely spread throughout the structure of the church. Authority in Anglicanism is more about building a consensus than issuing dictates and in many ways it mirrors decision making in the very early church.

Cooperative Ministry

There is a genuine cooperation between clergy and laity in the running and administration of churches. The laity face and accept their responsibilities and are not infantilised. It may be a little harder to get things done but it's much more of an adult to adult relationship.

Informed Congregations

On the whole, and partly because of our roots in the reformation, congregations tend to be more theologically literate and informed. There are genuine debates and even disagreements between clergy & laity. People expect more than being told what to believe, they require reasoned argument and they reserve the right make up their minds.

Liturgically Varied

It's a broad church with almost every variety of liturgical expression. Liturgical choices are based upon beliefs and tradition. It does mean that you have to think through why you do things in the liturgy and perhaps it's more intellectually rigorous than just following the rubrics.

Education not Training

The essential difference in styles is similar to that between education and training. A person is trained to carry out a task in particular way, with often highly specified methods and outcomes. Education gives a person the tools to enquire and learn about tasks and leaves them make their own decisions as to how best achieve the goals they have decided upon.

Unity & Diversity

Diversity in the Anglican church is not considered a weakness, but a virtue. God created each of us unique and an homogenous church is therefore likely to be a oppressed and oppressive organisation.

Freedom to Marry and have a Family

An obvious thing to say but true nevertheless. Celibate and married clergy working along side each other makes for a more holistic ministry. The fact that an individual can choose to marry or not is essentially very Anglican.

Better Stipends

You get an average of 20k instead of an average of 8k.

Better Housing

The housing is on the whole better.

Catholic & Reformed

Anglicanism in genuinely Catholic; bishops, priests and deacons with a succession going back to the apostles, a parish church for every community, monastic and lay communities, cathedral worship and a universal ministry to every person in the country. Anglicanism is also genuinely reformed; the Bishop of Rome has no jurisdiction, Roman teaching and dogma are simply those of a sister church and you are not required to teach, believe in them or adhere to them. The primacy of conscience is a cheque you can cash in England but not in Rome.

How do I apply ?

Apply in person to any Anglican Bishop who will no doubt be delighted to discuss your admission into the Anglican Communion. You almost certainly won't need to be re-trained or re-ordained but you may need to spend some time acclimatising to your new freedoms and getting used to the unique and wonderful culture of Anglicanism.

Absolutely not

2009-11-09T15:23:00.003Z

The Bishop of Fulham, today said:-

'For some of us I suspect our bluff is called! This is both an exciting and dangerous time for Christianity in this country. Those who take up this offer will need to enter into negotiation with the Church of England about access to parish churches and many other matters. This situation must not be used to damage the Church of England but I do believe we have a valid claim on our own heritage in history.'

My response is absolutely not ..... If clergy leave the Church of England for Rome they must have the courage of their convictions and leave their churches, vicarages and stipends behind. If Rome wants these people it must support and pay for them, not get them on the cheap, subsidised by the Church of England.

Any attempt to keep hold of property after you've become a Roman Catholic is morally wrong, legally unsupportable and unworkable, see;- http://bit.ly/36BR33

Rome must now say very clearly that it will not accept Anglican churches & vicarages.

Begining of the End

2009-11-09T12:48:00.000Z

So the Apostolic Constitution has been published and for what it is worth here's my opinion:-

FiF is now between a rock and very hard place !

Going to Rome isn't an attractive proposition; you've got to leave your church, vicarage and stipend for an entirely self financing existence in the personal ordinate. Not one of the FiF parishes in my deanery pays a full common fund contribution, but at least that will be helped by reducing the 20k stipend to the 8k Roman average. Clearly there is going to be no compensation paid by the CofE. Ex-Roman clergy and divorced priests aren't welcome and future married seminarians can only de ordained with Papal permission. Going to Rome might have been a romantic ideal for some Anglo-Catholic clergy the reality is very different and somewhat harsh. I honestly think when all the fuss has died down less than 200 clergy will actually go to Rome, and many of those will be retired clergy safely drawing their CofE pension.

As for staying in the C of E, it seems to me that there will be less sympathy (not more) for those opposed to the ordination & consecration of women. Now there is a Roman option for those opposed there is the very real possibility of synod making no statutory provision for FiF priests.

For all the celebratory atmosphere of the last FiF conference I believe this is actually the beginning of the end for non affirming Anglo-catholics. Within 25 years they will be a footnote in church history.

Whatever happened to the Countess of Huntingdon's Connection ?

Case by Case Basis

2009-11-09T11:35:00.000Z

To quote the apostolic constitution published today:-

'The Ordinary, in full observance of the discipline of celibate clergy in the Latin Church, as a rule (pro regula) will admit only celibate men to the order of presbyter. He may also petition the Roman Pontiff, as a derogation from can. 277, §1, for the admission of married men to the order of presbyter on a case by case basis, according to objective criteria approved by the Holy See.'

Which means that celebacy as the norm for all Roman clergy (including ex-anglicans) will continue and only the Pope can grant exemptions. The effect of having married (ex-anglican) clergy in the Roman Catholic Church is thereby minimised. In short the conservatives won the argument, what a surprise !

Roman Rumours

2009-11-07T20:00:00.002Z

I was chatting to a respected RC journalist recently who was telling me that one of the possibilities for accommodating former Anglicans who become Roman Catholics is that they might be given currently unused buildings of which there are apparently quite a number. When I suggested that some would like to continue to operate from their existing (Anglican) premises I was told emphatically that nobody in the RC hierarchy is seriously contemplating that !

Sensing an unusually authoritative tone I asked when the full details of the Roman offer would be made public ? I was told that two groups were trying to influence the text;- group one who want married Anglican clergy admitted one by one (on a case by case basis) with no provision for ordaining married clergy who have a vocation after the date of their admission into the Roman Catholic Church and group two who want some form of provision so that people within former Anglican churches / congregations can be ordained if they are married. The reason for this debate;- the effect on the Roman Catholic Church as a whole with regard to clerical celibacy. In short until the issue is resolved there will be no text issued by Rome.

So all very interesting and yes I know it's essentially just gossip between two people, but I'm very much hoping the first paragraph is true

2009-11-05T16:33:00.001Z

20 Parishes for the Italian Mission

Apparently (see http://tinyurl.com/yj2wmw8) the nice Italian missionaries are being joined by 20 or so parishes from the UK Traditional Anglican Communion (see http://tinyurl.com/yzjnuz7) and this good news will please those at the Italian mission HQ in Rome !

In the real world; - If I were a member of the Italian mission I'd be asking; who are these people ? Have you seen their web site ? Have you seen pictures of their worship in sheds & garages converted into chapels ? Have you seen lots of pictures of odd looking clergy with almost no lay people ? Have you seen that most of these so called parishes don't meet weekly and have no published service times ? I think this might be a group of religious enthusiasts who upon being refused ordination / office by main stream churches have ordained themselves (and probably each other) and effectively started their own church. Doesn't sound very catholic to me, in fact exactly the opposite !

I think the nice Italian missionaries should be more careful / discerning !

Positive Anglo-Catholic Agenda

2009-11-04T17:31:00.001Z

I've been wondering what my positive agenda for Anglo-Catholicism might be and here's a first attempt;-

Commitment to the disadvantaged

Following the example of the early tractarians the Anglo-Catholic movement should have a bias towards ministering in socially deprived parishes and working with those disadvantaged and discriminated against by society. Against the prevailing culture of the time Jesus associated with tax collectors, prostitutes, rebels and sinners, the Anglo-Catholic movement should actively seek out and minister amongst the marginalised in our modern society.

Commitment to beauty and excellence in worship

The Anglo-Catholic movement should encourage aesthetic beauty in buildings, interiors, items of devotion and insist upon excellence in all aspects of worship. Our earthly worship prefigures heaven;- beauty, excellence and transcendence should be the hallmarks of our worship.

Commitment to teach the meaning of symbols and sacraments

Common ignorance of religious symbolism and the sacraments is endemic even within the church. We should be committed to teaching symbols and sacraments repeatedly and at every opportunity and stage of church life. Every Anglo-Catholic church member should be able to articulate the meaning (and practical application) of the sacraments.

Commitment to personal devotion

In a culture where passive entertainment predominates we should encourage people to engage with scripture, meditate, pray and receive communion on a daily basis if possible. We should be teaching that dedication and spiritual discipline bear fruits in depth and fullness of life.

Commitment to Mission

We should be committed to two sorts of mission;- one to evangelise the un-churched, preaching to gospel to everyone who will listen and two to explain and teach Anglo-Catholic practices & spiritually within the existing church.

Commitment to proclaim the CofE Catholic & Reformed

The Anglo-Catholic movement should confidently proclaim itself as the Catholic Church in England, derived from the apostles, with a full apostolic succession and authority to decide upon matters of ministry and church order. It should be the natural choice of the English people for the pastoral offices and faith enquiry. We should seek Christian Unity but also value our unique Christian historical heritage as positive and vital contribution to the world wide and universal church.

A Positive Agenda for Anglo-Catholicism

2009-10-24T16:24:00.000+01:00

For those of us who were never going to Rome anyway 'The' question facing the Anglo-Catholic movement is;- what do we stand for ?

A Success Story

If you look at the original aims of the tractarian movement and compare the church of 1830 with the church of today;- you'll see that Anglo-Catholicism has been a massive success. The clergy have evolved from indolent upper-class gentlemen into a faith centred vocational profession. Worship at the vast majority of churches has been transformed; most churches are liberal catholic now compared to the 1800s. Open sittings (no reserved seats or purchased pews) are universal and symbols are used and accepted as normal. The protesting (protestant) reaction to the excesses of the pre-reformation period is over;- it's no longer an indication of your churchmanship if you light a candle in church or not. In short the Anglo-Catholic movement has transformed the Church of England.

Not Just Aping Rome

One of the natural divisions within the Anglo-Catholic movement from the very beginning was between those who saw the journey as ending in Rome (Newman et al) and those for whom the end was a distinctive Anglican Catholicism (Pusey et al). Whilst the movement was inspired by Roman Catholicism it was never just a stepping stone to communion with the Bishop of Rome.

Why not just become a Roman Catholic ?

So the answer to the above question must be because there is something unique, distinctive and worth keeping in the Anglo-Catholic expression of the Church of England. What is that ? ;- the universal nature of the Church of England, a parish for every person in the country, social engagement with every kind of community, including not excluding people, equality for women (including in ministry), freedom of thought, expression and debate, the use of symbols & sacraments to enhance & deepen faith but not to encourage medieval superstitions.

Rome in Error

The negative answer to the above paragraph's question must be that Rome is in error. I've listed a few of Rome historical errors in the preceding blog. One of its current errors is the refusal to admit women to ordained ministry. From my conversations with Roman Catholic lay people the vast majority would support woman priests, but Rome isn't interested in listening just telling. Part of the ecumenical process in the future must be Rome listening to its separated brothers and sisters and asking itself why they left and why they won't rejoin ? We're reformed Catholics for good reasons.

A Positive Agenda

So given that Anglo-Catholics are an integral and vital part of the Church of England, that we're here to stay and that the Church of England is likely to be around for hundreds of years to come, what positive agenda have we got / ought we to have ?

If we can't answer this question then we deserve to die out, if we can then we just might have the same kind of transforming influence that we've had in the past .......

I'm not going to Rome

2009-10-23T11:20:00.005+01:00

Like many Anglo-Catholics I've had a long love affair with city of Rome, all things Italian (& Roman) and the prospect of visible Christian Unity, but even if Benedict 16th asked me personally I wouldn't become a Roman Catholic because;-

The reformation was necessary

The corruption and blatantly un-Christian practices of the medieval church needed confronting. Who can defend the sale of forgiveness or the mistresses and illegitimate children of the popes ? And why did it then take 400 years to admit that, for example, services in the local / vernacular language were a good idea ? Did the idea mature like cheese over those 400 years until it was right or just perhaps Rome was plain wrong for 400 years ? (between the reformation the 2nd Vatican Council) Presumably the same might be true of communion in both kinds, the collegiality of bishops and now the marriage of clergy.

Rome contributed to the schism

The commonly held view that the reformers caused the split or schism in the church does not take account of the fact that the medieval papacy was incapable of handling criticism or dissent (burning those you disagree with is NOT a form of debate) and hardened it's position rather than consider / contemplate change. Rome could have handled Luther and his moderate requests for a debate very differently and possible even have kept him within the church. Instead with supreme arrogance they declared nothing was wrong, Luther excommunicated and more of the same (aka the Counter Reformation). I contend that Rome contributed at the very least half to the schism. And what exactly has changed since then:-

Indulgences

Apparently visiting the bones of St Theresa of Lisieux will get you a plenary indulgence (forgiveness of all sins up to that point in time), which can be applied to you or anyone you choose, dead or alive; really ? Can any modern person believe in a divine economy of salvation in which merit can be transferred between people ? Surely this is a medieval throwback ! Does anyone in the Roman church ever think to themselves;- 'I wonder what Jesus would make of this ?' - clearly not if they keep teaching this kind of thing. And what of Rome's more modern teaching:-

Contraception

The Roman aberrance of contraception is incomprehensible to most, but Rome explains it as 'respect for life'. I contend that it's more like fear of sex, or to be precise fear of the enjoyment of sex. Rome can't understand why the vast majority of its members take no notice of its moral teaching. Where moral philosophy turns deadly, literally, is in Africa; where combined with HIV, denying access to contraceptives kills people. What kind of church would rather be right (in it's own mind) than help save lives ?

Uniformity

Another not so attractive aspect of the Roman church is the way that uniformity is enforced and debate is discouraged, occasionally outright stifled. Interestingly there are divergent views in the Roman church but more often than not when you speak to individual RC's you'll find them disagreeing with much Roman Catholic teaching but unable to voice their opinions or be heard within their own church. Roman Catholic university lecturers can find their official permission to teach withdrawn for independent thinking and teaching and books have to carry the imprimatur (official stamp of correct teaching). Roman clergy are monochrome compared to Anglican clergy which is hardly surprising considering they are told what to do and exactly how to do it, down to how many inches apart to hold their hands whilst saying mass. In short Rome enforces uniformity across the world wide church. Compare that to the diversity that is the Anglican Communion ! Difference, Diversity and Debate are not in themselves wrong and to be avoided. Monotonous Monochrome Monoculture, now that's something worth avoiding !

The Issue of Property

2009-10-21T06:26:00.000+01:00

I'm reminded by the title of Fr Simon Rundell's recent blog Across the Tiber Some Will Go Carry What with Them ? that the whole issue of property, churches and vicarages, is one that has to be resolved before soon-to-be former Anglican clergy and possibly whole congregations join the Roman Catholic Church.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if some were contemplating joining Rome whilst remaining in their Anglican vicarages and churches. I have to say that is totally unacceptable;- morally wrong, legally unsupportable and practically unworkable.

Morally Wrong

If you are leaving the Anglican Church for another denomination is it morally acceptable to take the property you occupy with you ? I don't think so; All the property built since the reformation was paid for by former generations of loyal Anglicans who shared the theology, ecclesiology and vision of a reformed catholic national church, not the church of Rome. I would also argue those properties built before the Reformation morally belong to the national church too. And even if soon-to-be ex-Anglicans were to try to take property with them would it be morally right for the church of Rome to accept the property ? No;- if Rome accepts the property then it would also have to accept the loss of property when Roman clergy leave, which of course it will never do. If Rome wants to have any kind of continuing ecumenical relationship with the C of E then it will have to make property provision for converts from it's own resources.

Legally Unsupportable

There are two points to be made under this heading, one that property owned as a right of freehold is property granted by right of office which ceases when the officer holder gives up his office to become a Roman Catholic and two that the Roman Catholic church has formally & legally given up it's claim on Anglican property, churches and cathedrals, which was a quid-pro-quo for Catholic Emancipation. It might even be that those properties owned by Anglican catholic charities and trusts, which includes some notable churches, will have in their trust deeds stipulations that prevent the properties being used for anything other than Anglican catholic worship & purposes. The charity commission will need to examine each trust & charity case if and when the need arises.

Practically Unworkable

One of the reasons I bother to type Roman Catholic rather than just Catholic is that I totally refuse to accept the idea that the Roman church is 'THE' catholic church in England. The Anglican church is 'THE' Catholic (universal) church in England. It has a parish for every area and person in the country. It's unthinkable that some parish churches should become Roman Catholic. Do you really think that we should just give up on whole geographical areas of the country ? Like Chichester diocese for example ? Even if in an FiF fantasy if all of Chichester Diocese became Roman Catholic along with their church buildings the Church of England would still have a absolute duty to re-found the Diocese and plant churches throughout the whole area ! The people of Chichester have a right to worship in an Anglican church and the C of E has a duty to provide for those needs. It's never going to happen !

An Opportunity

On a more positive note, catholic minded & affirming Anglican clergy have endured nearly 17 years of limited job opportunities, because FiF parishes are closed to them. With a FiF exodus to Rome the C of E is going need catholic clergy to minister in parishes and to re-found some parishes where whole congregations have converted to Rome. On the basis that no area or parish should be abandoned by the C of E and that buildings will be vacated by departing clergy & people, there is going to be a alot more work for SCP priests. So whilst I'm genuinely saddened by the whole 'Roman Offer' and it's implications for our church there might yet be a little light at the end of the tunnel.

Mixed Blessing

2009-10-20T13:26:00.003+01:00

I've finally been driven to blog by today's events;-

The announcement this morning that the Roman Catholic Church will set up a process to receive Anglican Catholics en-mass will I suspect turn out to be a mixed blessing for the rest of us in the Church of England.

Roman Catholic Triumphalism
I hope that I'm not alone in being really rather irritated recently by RC triumphalism, of which today's news is just the latest example. I'm wondering where are voices criticising Benedict 16th, the backwards looking Latin Mass supporters, the plenary indulgence for visiting the relics of St Thérèse of Lisieux, the continued teaching on contraception that in conjunction with HIV kills so many in Africa, the correlation between the forced celibacy and sexual abuse, the over controlling centralisation of the Roman Curia and the suppression of discussion and dissent? The reform of the catholic church in England happened for valid reasons, some are still valid today !

Anyway a number of Anglican clergy will now go to Rome, possibly en-mass led by a Forward in Faith Bishop, Rome will rejoice and the C of E will look a little weaker, but in the longer term what will be the effect of such a defection?

Weakening Forward in Faith
One of the most obvious effects of today's news is that Forward in Faith will have less members. If you look at the average age of FiF clergy you'll see an obvious but as yet unspoken truth; in less than ten years there won't be enough clergy under retirement age to staff the churches they have persuaded and cajoled into petitions A,B&C. The FiF Clergy demographic is a ticking time bomb. So today's news just hastens that day. What will happen to these churches when there aren't enough FiF priests ? How will those who chose to remain behave ?

Lessening Destructive Dissent
Another effect of today's news is that a number of clergy who have been a destructive force in the church will lessen. Those who don't come to chapter (a regular local area clergy gathering), participate in diocesan / area events, attend the chrism mass (the annual renewal of ordination vows and blessing of oils for use in the year) and generally treat the rest of us as if we were lepers will be less in number. There will be less need when organising diocesan / area events to make provision for FiF clergy and their fear of contamination. All in all the feeling and character of the C of E will change just a little but it will make the life of women and affirming catholic clergy easier and happier.

A Roman Headache
And after the celebrations of those who go over to Rome some will awake with a very Roman headache. The individualism, the freedom of thought and discussion, the right to dissent, the varied and esoteric liturgical practices, the vicarages, the Anglican stipends, the pensions, the turning a blind eye to an indiscretion in Old Compton Street, the Cathedrals, the musical tradition, the parish system and even the average Anglican congregation will be a distant memory; Replaced by an altogether more homogenous, uniform, controlled, specified and grey reality that is Rome Inc, Universal World Wide Religion PLC;- like McDonald's, identical where you go !

Augustine of Canterbury

Apple-v-Windows

Benedict XVI - A Disastrous Papacy

What is it with TV programmes about the supernatural ?

Time to confidently reassert we're Catholic and Reformed

Satori - a moment of realisation

Papal Mass Only £25

An open letter to the Archbishops

I had hoped I wouldn't live this long

11 Top Blogs by Augustine of Canterbury

Anti-Catholicism or Valid Criticism

Exclusive News of the UK Papal Visit

Get a Grip !

Why I'm Voting Labour

German cartoon offends some / saddens me

7 Ordinations in England & Wales

Half of FiF clergy to have retired within 10 years

Uganda and Bishop Elect Mary Glasspool

Full, open and blatant schism

Pope to become Archbishop of Canterbury

Cranmer

Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic

Roma-il-mare

The Death Cookie

Abused then asked to pay

The laity aint havin it - Anglicanorum coetibus

New Pope Needed

Wine advice - go for the animal on the label

Am I more effective on-line than in person ?

Recommended Reading

Clerical Sexual Abuse

Don't Canonise John Paul II - It's a mistake & precedent you'll regret

Time to decide ......

Mary Co-Redemptrix : A dogma too far .....

Make the Pope Pay

Synod will probably NOT vote for Women Bishops

Judge Cherie Booth QC

Fr John Henry Newman - An Anglican

1662 Prayer Book & Anglo-Catholic Interpretation

A visit to Westminster

'The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this Realm of England

Thousands leave the Church of England?

The Queen, The Pope and The Right to Discriminate

More from Morocco ......

Imagery of Suffering and Mission

Filming Holy Week

On location in Morocco

Should you be in church or at a party on New Years Eve ?

Sharia and Monsoon

Apostolic Succession: an Anglo-Catholic Fetish

Poor Joseph Cartoon - I'm not offended

Saint John Paul II - Just say NO

Turning the hearts of the disobedient to the wisdom of the just

Anglo-Papalist or Anglo-Catholic

Just for Fun; Bad Vestments

ECUSA are just Anglicans

Uganda and the Election of Canon Mary Glasspool

Human Sexuality alla Romana

Clergy Pay and Conditions

The Authority to Ordain Women

Back to Church Sunday (Church Mouse is SO right!

Dublin Abuse Report and the Catholic Herald

Civil Religion ?

Forward in Faith

Debate not vandalism

Wash and Go

Rowan's Pectoral Cross from the Pope

Pope John Paul II would whip himself before he ordained priests

No greener grass

Bishop Tom Butler provides clear leadership ....

The Rt Rev. Dr Tom Butler, Bishop of Southwark

A Counter Offer

Absolutely not

Begining of the End

Case by Case Basis

Roman Rumours

Positive Anglo-Catholic Agenda

A Positive Agenda for Anglo-Catholicism

I'm not going to Rome

The Issue of Property