Current situation in the West Bank
From Mr David McDowall
Sir, — Because the Anglican Church has been relatively quiet about the horrors going on in Palestine, the letter of four bishops regarding the West Bank (The Observer, 22 September) is greatly to be welcomed.
They urge, as they should, that the International Court of Justice’s Advisory Opinion that Israel’s occupation must end should be implemented without delay, as voted for in the General Assembly on 18 September.
That same day, 38 UN experts warned, however, that the international rules-based order with which we have lived since 1945 is now on a knife edge, because too many states are unwilling to act. They were too polite to name names, but we can and should: all those states like the US and UK which either opposed or abstained in that General Assembly vote. These UN experts draw our attention to the world-wide dangers of such irresolution.
In 1946, Churchill reminded the world: “The League of Nations did not fail because of its principles or conceptions. It failed because these principles were deserted by those States who had brought it into being. It failed because the Governments of those days feared to face the facts and act while time remained.” We have been warned yet again. No excuses for silence.
DAVID McDOWALL
13 Cambrian Road
Richmond TW10 6JQ
From Judith Dimond
Sir, — It is good that Anglican bishops are speaking out, but could it be that a very small change in vocabulary would make much clearer the illegality and harm that is being caused in the West Bank to Palestinian families, both Muslim and Christian? I am tired of the violent intruders’ being termed “settlers”. Can they be named for what they illegally are: trespassers and squatters?
JUDITH DIMOND
4 Dryden Close
Canterbury, Kent
PTO decision for cleric charged over protest
From Coco Huggins
Sir, — The way in which the Revd Sue Parfitt’s permission to officiate (PTO) is being handled (News, 20 September) raises important questions about how we as the Church navigate the law.
It is clear that power is ordained by God and that we must submit to governing authorities, even when this is difficult (Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2). This does not, however, extend to laws that require us to disobey God, because God would not ordain a law that would make us go against his word. In this case, it is our duty to obey God first and not the law, as Peter makes abundantly clear in Acts 5.
Engaging in civil disobedience because of a lack of action by authorities to protect God’s creation, of which we are divinely ordained stewards (Genesis 1), is something that could be seen to meet this call to obey God above all.
Regardless of this, the decision not to renew Ms Parfitt’s PTO when she presents no obvious safeguarding risk contrasts with recent failures to remove clergy who have been deemed significant risks to children and young people. In some instances, this would appear to be because legal and disciplinary procedures in the Church inhibited the authorities (at least to some extent) from doing so.
This should prompt us both to re-examine our theology of lawbreaking and, on a practical level, re-evaluate how we approach different kinds of wrongdoing (either perceived or otherwise) in our Church.
COCO HUGGINS
Pembroke College, Cambridge CB2 1RF
Professor MacCulloch on the Bible and marriage
From the Revd Jonathan Frais
Sir, — Professor Diarmaid MacCulloch says that it is “a big mistake” to call the Bible “the word of God” when this term refers to Jesus alone (Features, 20 September).
But David called God’s word “a lamp to my feet” (Psalm 119.105), the prophets declared, “Hear the word of the Lord“ (e.g. Isaiah 66:5), Jesus said to the Father that he had given his disciples “your word” (John 17.14), and we must re-learn “the truths of God’s word” (Hebrews 5.12).
It seems that scripture — as inspired, accumulated, and overseen by the Holy Spirit — calls us to use “word” for itself as well as for its central theme, the Lord Jesus (who, like scripture, is both human and divine).
The post-war liturgical conclusion is therefore correct. This is the word of the Lord; thanks be to God.
JONATHAN FRAIS
11 Coverdale Avenue
Bexhill-on-Sea TN39 4TY
From the Revd Martin Jewitt
Sir, — Professor Diarmaid MacCulloch offers a wide range of related subjects on the Christian history of sexuality and marriage.
Leaving these aside, one anomaly that he completely misses is what is really meant by the official Church of England doctrine, which I understand to be that the only true place for sexual intimacy is within monogamous marriage. We can assume that this means by a legally solemnised ceremony. Or does it?
He reminds us that, for up to 1200 years of Christianity, “there was no such thing as a wedding in church.” Much more recently — in my memory — there was popular acceptance of “common-law marriage”. And now most churches (as I have done) happily welcome cohabiting couples and baptise their children.
Marriage is a covenanted relationship, but what should we be teaching about what is required to make that covenant in which “a man leaves his father and mother, and is joined to his wife, and the two become one flesh”?
MARTIN JEWITT
12 Abbott Road
Folkestone CT20 1NG
Intolerant objection to the Five Guiding Principles
From the Revd Neil D. Bryson
Sir, — The Revd Martine Osborne complains (Letters, 20 September) that Birmingham is advertising for a Precentor who must assent to the Five Guiding Principles, which, she claims, are discriminatory.
The first of these Principles states: “Now that legislation has been passed to enable women to become bishops the Church of England is fully and unequivocally committed to all orders of ministry being open equally to all, without reference to gender, and holds that those whom it has duly ordained and appointed to office are true and lawful holders of the office which they occupy and thus deserve due respect and canonical obedience.” I was baffled: how is this discriminatory?
Unless I have misunderstood the Chair of WATCH, she must surely be delighted by the above-mentioned Principle. That this is working in practice, we can look at the growing number of women in senior positions, including bishops, in the Church; in the same edition (News) we learn that the next Bishop of Southampton is a woman.
Then the penny dropped. Provision is also made for those “who, on grounds of theological conviction, are unable to receive the ministry of women bishops or priests”. Although the Principles gave her what she wanted, Ms Osborne wants them abolished. Why? She does not want others to be permitted to disagree with her and still remain in the Church, let alone flourish. She may deny this, but how else could her intolerant remarks possibly be construed?
NEIL D. BRYSON
8 Cinnamon Road
Downham Market PE38 9UL
Bishops’ debate on Crown Nominations process
From the Revd Dr Charlie Bell
Sir, — It is good to see the modest, but necessary, changes for the Crown Nominations Commission (CNC) being accepted by the House of Bishops (News, 20 September). Of course, there will be yet more scrapping and fussing in the General Synod, but we can only hope that this doesn’t get bogged down in yet more culture wars.
What is so depressingly familiar is the form of the arguments in opposition to the changes. Dressed in the language of the moral high ground, these appeals to “take time” and be cautious are — let’s be totally frank — little more than attempts to block and prevent any change whatsoever. The reason for that, of course, is that — whatever the merits of these changes — this is seen as yet another proxy argument about Living in Love and Faith, and yet another opportunity to prevent any change, by the back door. The actual arguments are irrelevant: this is another boring attempt at power play.
Watching some bishops present themselves like this is rather distasteful: dishonesty is not a Christian virtue. It would be good for us to remember that, on occasion — particularly if we happen to be called to the pastoral ministry.
CHARLIE BELL
Fellow in Public Theology
Girton College
Cambridge CB3 0JG
From Canon A. J. Canning
Sir, — Your report of the Bishops’ meeting in Oxford seems to suggest that the Bishops agreed to do nothing in a hurry about the need for new Bishops of Ely and Carlisle. We are in a similar situation in Coventry.
We have an excellent Acting Bishop in the Rt Revd Ruth Worsley, the Bishop of Taunton, but we need her to be appointed Bishop of Coventry, so that she can cooperate in making important decisions about the future of our diocese.
I have written to the Archbishop of Canterbury, asking him to make an executive appointment speedily.
Although I have merely been a parish priest in the dioceses of Carlisle and Coventry, I have always found that where there is a vacancy for a churchwarden or other official, the Lord always provides an appropriate candidate, as he did in the case of Elijah and Elisha in 2 Kings.
The art of a Christian minister, priest, bishop, or archbishop is to discern whom it is that the Lord has chosen. In Coventry, the obvious new Bishop has already been appointed as our excellent Acting Bishop.
I am sure that the King would agree to this appointment, and I expect the Dean of Windsor, our former Bishop, would welcome the appointment, as would our vacancy-in-see committee. Something similar could be done in Ely and Carlisle.
There might be some objections, but they will soon blow over. The need for a bishop in the diocese is greater than the need for an appointment system.
JIM CANNING
13 Broadlands Close
Coventry CV5 7AJ
From the Revd Ben Phillips
Sir, — Regarding issues of distrust in the CNC, perhaps it is time for a root-and-branch reform of the whole system.
We are looking to discern the Holy Spirit’s guidance in the appointment of godly overseers; could we not do this through some form of open election allowing all members of our Church a vote?
There are examples of this working all over the world. I believe we are the only part of the Anglican Communion which appoints rather than elects our bishops.
BEN PHILLIPS
The Vicarage, Townhead Road
Dalston
Carlisle CA5 7JF
One of C of E’s positives
From Mr David Styles
Sir, — I have recently taken on a new communications post within the diocese of Norwich, after stints in Westminster and a range of journalistic and public-relations positions.
While attending the licensing ceremony of my colleague the Revd Richard Lamey, whom the Bishop of Norwich has now formally installed as our Diocesan Director of Mission and Ministry, I was struck by the unparalleled support routinely evident between peers past and present.
On an unseasonably mild Sunday afternoon, the pews of Norwich Cathedral were populated not only by ever-present members of the congregation alongside Richard’s new colleagues keen to welcome him, but by dozens of unfamiliar, smiling faces.
Such is the affection of those who have come to know Canon Lamey during his time as Rector of St Paul’s, Wokingham, a large contingent had undertaken a round trip of more than 300 miles.
In most political or media circles this nurturing culture is seldom seen. While the abundance of such acts may thankfully not seem unusual to many Church Times readers, I shall endeavour to maintain a full appreciation of just how uniquely brilliant such gestures are — and hope that others can also overlook humdrum gripes to focus instead on the unfettered joy of community intrinsic to working and praying in today’s Church of England.
DAVID STYLES
109 Dereham Road, Easton
Norwich NR9 5ES
Two octocentenaries
From the Revd John-Francis Friendship TSSF
Sir, — While being grateful for the two articles that you published for the 800th anniversary of the receiving of the stigmata by St Francis of Assisi (Faith, 13 and 20 September), I was sorry not to find any report concerning the celebrations to mark the arrival of the first Franciscans to this country in the same year.
These were marked by their impressive ecumenical sharing and recalled the contribution of Franciscans to the life of our Church and nation for the past eight centuries, something explored by the book published for the event: Celebrating 800 Years of Franciscans in the British Isles.
The gift of the stigmata was consequent on Francis’s intense love of Jesus and devotion to the Passion of Christ, two vital aspects of the Franciscan charism. At a time when the Church is spending millions on evangelism, it may be this charism that needs to be pondered.
JOHN-FRANCIS FRIENDSHIP
22 The Old Fire Station
1 Eaglesfield Road
London SE18 3BT
Symphonic organ part
From Mr David Bell
Sir, — Richard Lawrence’s excellent Proms review (Arts, 20 September) mentioned the non-inclusion of the organ in a performance of Elgar’s Symphony No. 2. This prompts me to relate how the idea of an added organ part became known.
Some years back, Sir Adrian Boult gave a lecture to the Royal College of Organists in which he said that Elgar would add the organ bass at a certain point in the finale of the Second Symphony, if one was available. I remembered the lecture and in 1984 suggested to the producer of a new recording, by Vernon Handley and the LPO, that the organ be added.
The lecture was then located by the RCO, and the conductor’s permission was sought and given. So I played the organ in the finale and the record was issued in 1984.
But the late Ralph Downes told me subsequently that he had heard Elgar conduct the symphony on one occasion, and “huge bouts” of organ were added: “rather more than just the bass, with magnificent effect”.
DAVID BELL
8 Clave Street, London E1W 3XQ
Talking about mission
From Dr Phillip Rice
Sir, — It is likely that those Evangelical mission leaders who are assembling in Seoul this week will take a more rounded view than that of the Bishop of Chelmsford, Dr Guli Francis Dehqani (Quotes, 13 September): “If growth is to happen it will be God’s doing.”
The fourth Lausanne Congress (22 to 28 September 2024) brings together current leaders and representatives from around the world of Evangelical missions and churches to look at the 25 emerging gaps set out in the Great Commission Report to the fourth Congress.
The number-one theme is how emerging global population blocks can be reached. And the list of 25 gaps spans: ministry in a digital age; what does it mean to be human; what is polycentric mission; how can spirituality and holiness define missions; what is community; and what is our Christian influence on society in creation, societal trust, freedom, and politics?
The growth in global Christian missions as seen in its various metrics of numbers of national- and people-group members who are Christian, and who have come to faith in the past half-century speaks of the confidence in the progress of the Great Commission. Anglicans outside Western Europe are strongly represented.
Certainly, the first Lausanne Congress had strong Anglican roots in one of its co-chairs, the Revd Dr John Stott of All Souls’, Langham Place. He worked alongside the other co-chair, Dr Billy Graham, in 1974 to set up in Lausanne, Switzerland, the first congress. They produced the Lausanne Covenant as a call to evangelism and church growth, and to draw it together into a more cohesive structure the disparate missions work and workers.
So much has been achieved from networking that the Lausanne Congresses since 1974 are a powerful movement to see how Christians can prioritise growth and understand how God is at work in his global people in fulfilling the Great Commission.
PHILLIP RICE
Former board member of Operation Mobilisation
23 Christchurch Square
London E9 7HU