>From: "Mark Clavier+" <anglican@...> >>Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 18:00:21 -0400 > >Charles+, > >This a grand case of something being taken out of context and then others >running with it. > >++Williams simply stated that he ordained a man that he was fairly certain >was a homosexual. He did not inquire into the man's bedroom habits and >presumed that the man would seek to lead a chaste life. Now, ++Williams > >might define chaste differently that we do, but I don't think we can >fault him for his procedure. <SNIP> ================================ ========================================================= Fr. Mark+ Brother, I have to disagree with you on this one. I looked at more than one report in regard to ++Williams, and felt his own words justified what I wrote. Herewith are more complete statements by Williams in his own words. What we’re talking about here is not simply whether there should or not be homosexuals in the priesthood. I suspect in all communions there always have been and always will be men with that orientation.. That neither shocks, outrages, nor surprises me. In the case of the Roman Church, what is the difference if a man is attracted to women or men? If he has taken vows of chastity and lives by them, the result is still the same. Similarly in other communions, a person who lives chastely would not be questioned. The problem comes when we redefine what is is. Redefining chastity to include the possibility that (in ++Williams words) "it doesn’t necessarily mean giving up a homosexual lifestyle" is stretching the word a bit, don't you think? ++Williams is very well aware that if a gay or lesbian couple are given leadership of a congregation that this is something that would upset other Anglicans, and he is apparently willing to defend that, unless I completely misunderstand what I read. If I have misread his statements, I humbly apologise. The half dozen or more articles I have read recently about ++Williams all hail him as "traditional" and "anglo-catholic" in theology. I will make a point to get copies of his books this week to read and attempt to understand the man. The last paragraph of the article indicates he has "problems of conscience" and apparently is not ready to affirm all that tradition and his church believes. Charles+ ======================================.. This is from THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND NEWSPAPER http://www.churchnewspaper.com/ Article was dated May 30 and is in the papers archives on line. The Archbishop of Wales has admitted openly that he has ordained a man whom he knew had a homosexual partner. Archbishop Rowan Williams, a leading favourite to succeed Dr George Carey as Archbishop of Canterbury, made the revelation in an interview with Anglican Media Sydney during a visit to Australia last week. He explained: “I was aware that there was a long-term friendship. But I don’t see my task as going around the bedroom with a magnifying glass doing surveillance. I do see my job as making sure that someone who is going to be a priest in the Church is taking full responsibility for all that means.” He said that his pastoral principle in ordination is to ensure that the would-be priest will conform their lives and that of their household to Christ. But he acknowledged that ‘‘conforming your life…… to Christ’’ doesn’t necessarily mean giving up a homosexual lifestyle. “This is where I recognise I am in the minority, so I am cautious of making this a great campaigning issue. I am not convinced that a homosexual has to be celibate in every imaginable circumstance.” His admission, only a couple of weeks before the Crown Appointments Commission meets to decide the next Archbishop, could damage his chances of being selected. In the past, his tacit support of homosexuals has been known, but until now he has not been so open in flouting Issues on Human Sexuality, which concluded that the Anglican Church should not ordain practising homosexuals. Only days before his interview, in a visit to Uganda, Archbishop Williams said that his views on homosexuality were in a minority in the Anglican Communion. In response to questions after a lecture he gave at the Uganda Christian University, Archbishop Williams drew a distinction between conclusions he came to as a theological professor and what the Church officially says. “And I hope there may still be the possibility of thinking through these issues and saying: 'Well, we don’’t know all the answers yet, and not assuming straight away that this is the one issue that must divide us as Christians'. “That I know, is a controversial point of view. I wish I could say more wholeheartedly that I accept ever aspect of the traditional teaching and that I accept personally every aspect of what the majority of people in my Church believe. I can’t say that in conscience…… So my hope is not to impose a view from America or Britain or anywhere else on any other province, but to see if we can go on talking prayerfully with each other, reading the Bible together with each other, to see what we can learn.” _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx