Tuesday, February 9, 2010

THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY'S SPEECH AT GENERAL SYNOD

When Grandpère saw the printed version of the ABC's speech on the kitchen counter, he asked me what it was. When he had read a little and flipped through the pages, he said, "The speech was that long!" When I nodded, he said, "Well, I wouldn't listen."

I find that I must take breaks in reading the speech because I become exasperated and angry. Reading in fits and starts is not ideal, but I fear that's my way with most of the ABC's speeches and writings.

The ABC puts me off near the beginning of his address by referencing the law which would permit assisted suicide in the same breath as the law which would disallow the church from discriminating against LGTB persons. That's a scare tactic. Plus, the ABC chooses not to speak or write concisely or with clarity. Many words to say very little and obfuscation seem to be his way.

On the equality law in the UK:

One is that we all in fact recognise that communities and organisations have a certain liberty to define what belonging to them might entail; those who belong have to some extent chosen to live with the limits that a community has settled upon, even if they want to argue with those limits or seek to shift them.

The Church of England community has by no means settled upon limits, my dear sir. I hear many different views expressed. Your notion of limits entails a good many partnered gay clergy being allowed to serve in the church only by remaining in the closet, which somehow seems not quite right to me.

Women bishops in the Church of England:

And for both many women in the debate and most if not all traditionalists, there is a strong feeling that the Church overall is not listening to how they are defining for themselves the position they occupy, the standards to which they hold themselves accountable.

Why is the opposition to women bishops not bigotry? Why should bigotry be given a hearing?

The ordination of gay bishops:

The freedom claimed, for example, by the Episcopal Church to ordain a partnered homosexual bishop is, simply as a matter of fact, something that has a devastating impact on the freedom of, say, the Malaysian Christian to proclaim the faith without being cast as an enemy of public morality and risking both credibility and personal safety.

As Ann Fontaine said in the comments at The Lead:

I wonder why he never thinks of gay/lesbian/transgender Anglicans and others in Malaysia who actually suffer death not just threats.

On restraint:

Sometimes that may entail restraint – as I believe it does and should in the context of the Communion – though that restraint is empty and even oppressive if it then refuses to engage with those who have accepted restraint for the sake of fellowship.

Tobias Haller asks a question in the comments to the same post at The Lead:

Why is "restraint" always posed as restraint from action rather than as restraint from reaction?

And then the ABC is onward and upward with the folderol that the Covenant will be the solution to the problems in the Anglican Communion. I don't believe that the Covenant is the solution, but I lean more and more toward the opinion that the Episcopal Church should consider quite seriously whether we can, in good conscience, sign on to the Covenant to keep our place at the table in the Anglican Communion, because I believe our presence seems ever more necessary with each day that passes. If the Episcopal Church is to be "distanced" to the outer ring of the AC, then perhaps it's best that rather than taking the initiative in distancing ourselves, we let the distancing be done to us.

"Three-dimensionality" is the ABC's buzz word, seeing from all sides, which is all well and good so long as "three-dimensionality" does not lead to paralysis.

On Uganda:

And then I think of a telephone conversation in December with the Archbishop of Uganda, discussing what was being done by Ugandan Anglicans in the devastated north of the country – in the rehabilitation of child soldiers and the continuing, intensely demanding work with all victims of trauma in that appalling situation, work that no-one else is doing or is trusted to do; and the ongoing work of care for those with HIV, where the Uganda Church was in the forefront of African responses to that crisis. Three-dimensionality in a church that has been caricatured as passionately homophobic and obsessed with narrow Biblicism.

On the other hand, this from the The Lead:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Church of Uganda associates itself with the concerns expressed in the Anti Homosexuality Bill 2009. However, instead of a completely new Bill, the Church recommends a Bill that amends the Penal Code Act (Cap.120) addressing loopholes, in particular:

* protecting the vulnerabilities of the boy child;

* proportionality in sentencing;

* and, ensuring that sexual orientation is excluded as a protected human right.

Well, I'm sure that members of the Ugandan church do good work, but DAMMIT! if we can live with the Ugandan church and their support for draconian laws to punish LGTB persons, they should be able to live with us, although we have an openly gay bishop, or two, or three serving in our church.

Mine is not an exhaustive or measured critique of the speech, but rather a personal response to certain passages in the speech at a time when my emotions run high, and I probably shouldn't be writing. Some might say that my quotes are taken out of context. Read or listen to the entire address and decide for yourself.

For a more measured response see Tobias Haller's post. I'm sure others will follow.

16 comments:

  1. I was pleasantly surprised by a few things in +Williams' speech--his acknowledgment that he had caused pain to LGBTs and his recognition of their ministries.

    But then he equated support for full inclusion to support for the "Kill the Gays" legislation in Uganda. And made TEC responsible for what happens in Malaysia. And called us on the carpet once again, by name.

    I dropped my jaw after the first claim, but now I'm simply yawning. Same song, 15,000th verse.

    Mimi--I appreciate what you say about the Covenant, but I will do my utmost to defeat it...until and unless our so-called allies in the CoE and other, more progressive provinces come out of the closet (if you will) and start standing up for us. If they want us to remain in the Communion, it's WAY past time for them to stand up and say so, publicly. It's all well and good to run around on the blogs and tell us how much we mean to them--but where the rubber meets the road, the silence has been deafening.

    Pax,
    Doxy

    ReplyDelete
  2. Doxy, it was nice that Rowan apologized for the pain he caused to LGTB persons, but I'll wait to see if his words are followed by actions that demonstrate that he means not to cause them further pain. Is he just now realizing that he's caused LGTBs pain? Remember Rowan's good friend Jeffery John? He asked his forgiveness, too, or so I've heard.

    As to the Covenant, you see that I have not removed my "No Anglican Covenant" emblem from my sidebar. I am leaning, but I have not yet got to the place where I say we should support the Covenant.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The CT link on Uganda is broken - try this

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ann, that's odd, because I copied the Executive Summary from the Church of Uganda's website. I suppose they don't allow links. I'll change the link to The Lead, because I can't find the site where I copied the summary.

    ReplyDelete
  5. ¨The ABC puts me off near the beginning of his address by referencing the law which would permit assisted suicide in the same breath as the law which would disallow the church from discriminating against LGTB persons. That's a scare tactic. Plus, the ABC chooses not to speak or write concisely or with clarity. Many words to say very little and obfuscation seem to be his way.¨ GM

    That is EXACTLY how I reacted and exactly what I thought and think...Rowan Williams is still caught-up with his SNIDE hatch-job (tomorrow possibly to be continued with REAL vendictiveness) aimed directly at TEC. He´s obviously unworthy of his position when acting like a early-teen who has been rejected as a FULL FLEDGED spoiled brat. Leonardo Ricardo

    ReplyDelete
  6. We had that link too but they took it down right afterwards.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Leo, great minds.... ;-)

    Ann, that's interesting. Is the Church of Uganda ashamed of its position?

    ReplyDelete
  8. here is the new link - seems several posted at once - and they took down one. I never saw a post at the Uganda site.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ann, the Uganda site was there. I copied from it. I'm not dreaming. I wish I'd saved the address before I deleted.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I just sigh with exasperation when I read what the ABC says. I just don't understand where he's coming from. As to the Uganda issue, I'm not only appalled that a church I'm supposed to be in communion with would say such a thing, I'm terribly frightened for GLBT persons in that country. The church is supposed to be a place of refuge, but so often it persecutes the very people who need that refuge.

    ReplyDelete
  11. We have a saying where I come from which translated loosely says be careful of mice they bite as they comfort with their breath. This is a very bad translation but the essence is that be cautious of people who say a few good things in a lot of bad things. The totality of what he is saying is very bad and even what people see as good is not good. A person who apologizes but continues to harm is not really apologizing. He just wants to deceive us into listening to him. The Covenant is bad all round.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Did old bushy brows say something? I wasn't paying attention.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I'm not sure why, but I'm compelled to read Rowan's speechifying and letters to the faithful. And then, chances are, I'll get upset and need to vent.

    I'm afraid that Rowan will have to show me by actions that he has any regard at all for the Episcopal Church. He asks us and the Anglican Church of Canada to give and give and give, and he asks nothing of those who collude in attempts to destroy our churches.

    ReplyDelete
  14. In Uganda, as far as I can see, only the humanist community has come out in support of LGTB people but no church (even the Ugandan Quakers are anti-gay though I don't know their position on the bill). One Ugandan Anglican canon has come out against the bill which is, I feel, extremely brave of him.

    Also he isn't asking the TEC and Anglican church to give and give and give but rather to hurt and hurt and hurt their LGTB congregants.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The only reason he's "apologized" is that he's trying desperately to win the war (he started) with PR. I'm reminded of the line: "Next to him[Snape], who'd suspect p-p-poor st-st-stuttering P-p-p-professor Quirrell?" It's an act. "Oh, dear me. Here I am, a bit of a ham-handed old academic, saying things without thinking! Oh, dear, oh, dear, where was my head?!"

    We've outgrown Canterbury, and he knows it. He's hoping to keep us - or at least our money - by pretending to just be a sweet old professor who's a bit eccentric and forthright.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Integrity Uganda with retired Bishop Christopher Senyonjo is working there. Here is an old note about the bishop. Google for more.

    Voices of Witness: Africa is a great file by Cynthia Black and Katie Sherrod interviewing gblt persons in several countries of Africa - if you have not seen it - get a copy - all the Deputies and Bishops received one. Show it at your church if you can. These are the Anglicans that I am in solidarity with.

    ReplyDelete

Anonymous commenters, please sign a name, any name, to distinguish one anonymous commenter from another. Thank you.