Talk about timing! Just days after Anglican demi-god Desmond Tutu slammed Anglican leader Rowan Williams for his anti-gay ways, the Daily Telegraph hears murmurs that Williams plans to set pro-gay clergy straight:
The Archbishop of Canterbury is preparing to target individual bishops whose pro-gay policies threaten to derail his efforts to avert schism…
In a high-risk strategy, Dr Rowan Williams may even snub them by withdrawing their invitations to next year’s Lambeth Conference.
He has told friends he will challenge any bishop he believes is coming to the conference with an agenda “very much at odds” with his attempts to maintain unity in the worldwide Church.
…
[He] has now indicated that he is prepared to scrutinise controversial bishops he had already invited if there is evidence that they are unwilling to compromise their views.
We take it Tutu, gay Bishop Gene Robinson and Katharine Jefferts Schori, America’s homo-loving lady leader, will not be invited.
canada
You are assuming that Williams is strictly anti gay. Williams prior to this row was actually pro gay. You are also assuming that it is the “homo’ elements of the church he would get rid off. I have heard williams speak, I think he’s actually more willing to get rid of the conservative elements. he’s just trying to find middle ground between the two sides.
The Anglican communion is not like the Roman Catholic. The A. of Canterbury is not like the pope; he is more like the chair of a meeting rather than the supreme leader. the national groups wield more influence.
hells kitchen guy
I KNEW the “Rt. Rev. RES” would come back under an assumed name!! !
Steve Hansen
Very interesting. Rowan has told friends he will challenge any bishop … with an agenda. That leaves the question of, which bishops have such an agenda?
The bishops who have an agenda, and who are very much against maintaining unity in the Church, are the African bishops. The American bishops are just trying to minister to their churches and people. The African bishops are the ones who have issued threats. The African bishops are the ones who are trying to tell the others how, and to whom, they may minister. The African bishops are the ones who have issued ultimatums.
The right and honorable thing for Rowan to do is to write nice letters to those African bishops, regretfully acknowledging their resignations from the worldwide Church.
cwm
If they want to avoid schism, why don’t they simply agree all people are human…including us?
WWH
HKG, so did I!!!! HAHAHAHAHA! Good morning from NYC Rev.!
Jennifer
The posters above have hite the nail on the head: who says he will “uninvite” pro-gay bishops and not nuts like Akinola?
We’ll see if Michael Ingham of Vancouver gets uninvited. If he goes down, I expect you’re a little closer to the truth. If that happens, though, there’ll be hell to pay in the end. I hope His Mediocrity knows that.
Matt
Trouble is, at least as this Outsider understands, the antigay nutjob holinesses represent parts of the world with large and growing numbers of shiny new Anglicans, whereas the pro-gay bishops represent aging and declining populations. Since any church’s cash cow is its membership, that makes this a fiscally tough call for His Middling Chairmanship.
canada
im not the rt rev, just someone who follows the anglican communion debate because of its legal issues
Chesnut
Look at his picture. The evil eyebrows tell the story.
leomoore
I am not an Anglican or even a believer in deities, but I can see his position. He is trying to prevent a schism within the Anglican communion which is not an overarching church in the same sense as the Roman Catholics or even the truly awful Southern Baptists. Williams is trying everything within his power to keep the conservative bigots from declaring a schism. In such a schism, the Church of England would find itself on the other side from the bigots. I remember when Williams was appointed by the Queen, there was some controversy because he was sympathetic to the rights of gay people. I suppose if we didn’t have religions, bigoted practioners would find some other excuse to hate others.
Tom Farrell
Williams may be trying to prevent a schism, but clearly he has prioritized preventing a schism over humanely equal treatment of gay and lesbian people in the church. In every attempt to prevent schism, he acts to appease the radical right wingers, and expects all the change to come from those who favor equality for gay people… in other words, he expects gay people to suffer to prevent schism.
In doing this, he fails to recognize that schism is a two way street. If he keeps this up, there will come a point where the “liberals” will tell him and all the anti-gay african bishops “good bye, and don’t let the door hit you on the way out.” Far from averting a schism, his actions will eventually cause one.
Williams is supposed to be guiding a church. It’s all about morality, supposedly… so why isn’t he telling the anti-gay bishops they’re being immoral by discriminating and un-christian in their hostility to those who don’t agree with them? Schism may be unpleasant, but given the behavior of the anti-gay parties, it’s practically inevitable, and he’s a fool not to realize it. If he had any decency he’d be siding with those who are trying to be loving toward and respectful of their fellow humans… the Episcopal church.
matt123
“Look at his picture. The evil eyebrows tell the story.”
Agree:)
Gay people on Findbilover.com
alan brickman
he is so gay….