Comments: The Times interview reviewed

"When I mention the statements that have been made about civil liberties and so forth, I think it's important. It does mean that any local church that supports illegal discrimination or persecution of homosexuals is actually going against the Anglican Communion, and I have said that publicly."

- The ABC, reported by Andrew Brown - C.T. -

In the article about Abp. Rowan's interview with Ginny Dougary, Andrew Brown points to Rowan's opinion that illegal discrimination against homosexuals (in the Church?) is 'Going Against' the Anglican Communion. This is not news to those of us who believe that this is the true mind of the Archbishop. However, there are still those in the Anglican Communion (e.g. Nigeria, Rwanda and Uganda, Southern Cone and Sydney, et al) whose mind-set is somewhat different.

It looks likely that these latter Provinces of the Anglican Communion who are out of step with what Rowan is pleased to 'The Anglican Communion's' stance, may not present themselves at the next scheduled meeting of Primates in Ireland in 2011.
Perhaps, then, the status of who is in, and who is out of, the Communion - on this important human rights issue - may become resolved, once and for all. This cannot but be beneficial to the ethos of the Anglican Communion's tradition of inclusivity, and a signal to the Re-Asserters, that they can not presume to represent the Communion as a whole.

Posted by Father Ron Smith at Friday, 8 October 2010 at 11:47pm BST

"It does mean that any local church that supports illegal discrimination or persecution of homosexuals..."

What about churches that support Legal discrimination and persecution of homosexuals, Uganda comes to mind?

Posted by Göran Koch-Swahne at Saturday, 9 October 2010 at 7:57am BST

As Windsor said, some will choose to walk apart.

Posted by Tobias Haller at Saturday, 9 October 2010 at 3:50pm BST

Well, it may be true that those who back the (further) criminalization of homosexuality may be "going against the Anglican Communion," but it is also undeniably true that there are no consequences for Churches doing so. Consequences are reserved for those consecrating openly gay people as bishops.

Posted by Bill Dilworth at Saturday, 9 October 2010 at 4:19pm BST
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.