Affirmation Scotland

I have been asked by Blair Robertson of Affirmation Scotland to point out that AS has never been involved in discussions with another denomination. 

He denies that there ever was a post about Scott Rennie moving to the USA on the AS web-site.  I have no doubt that such a post existed, but it may be that it was a personal post by Rev Kim Cran who helped found AS but has returned to the USA.  Did anyone else see it?

On behalf of One Kirk

Yesterday, while I was cooking dinner (pasta carbonara) I received a phone call from a member of the One Kirk steering group.  He was upset about my statement on yesterday’s blog about “the Scott Rennie camp” speaking to another denomination.  He categorically denied any knowledge of this.  I am happy to acknowledge that this married man with children knew nothing of the discussions referred to.  However, I stand by what I said.  I only mentioned these discussions because it’s always the evangelicals who are accused of threatening to leave, when in fact others are doing the same.  Before the Assembly there was a post on the Affirmation Scotland site stating quite openly that Scott Rennie was actively contemplating ministry in the USA should the decision go against him.  That’s quite understandable; as are discussions with another British denomination.  But this has never been reported in the press.

The plot thickens

Brian Donnelly is certainly working over-time on this one.  Read today’s story in the Herald and then I’ll comment. 

Threat of plot to split kirk over gay ministers

Brian Donnelly

0 comments

Published on 9 Sep 2009

Evangelicals are plotting a split with the main body of the Church of Scotland over gay ordination and have held “large gatherings” across Scotland, The Herald can reveal.

The schism the Kirk tried desperately to avoid by postponing an open debate on appointing gay ministers and gagging members from discussing the issue at this year’s General Assembly is moving towards reality.

Churches opposed to the appointment of gay ministers have indicated their movement is growing and that new “leaders” are emerging.

Already, nearly 40 parishes have stood defiant against the Kirk by joining the evangelical group the Fellowship of Confessing Churches, saying they will not accept gay ordination.

They have posted covenants in churches supporting male/female relationships.

The Rev Louis Kinsey of St Columba’s in Aberdeen was one of six ministers in north-east Scotland that joined the fellowship after Rev Scott Rennie, who lives with his male partner, was confirmed to his appointment at Queen’s Cross Church in the city.  Rev Kinsey, a married father of two who has been a minister since 1991, defied the gagging order to declare that he believes a schism is “the only logical response to the Church of Scotland’s procrastination at the General Assembly”.  He said: “Groups of evangelicals have met; large gatherings in the north and in the central belt.   “My feeling is that some leadership is now beginning to emerge. A lot of serious and prayerful thought is happening but an obvious way forward has not become clear. “One or two ministers have left the Kirk. Even more members of the Kirk have done so. The summer break has been providential. It has offered time to think and discuss. We are all still in the process of weighing up the possibilities. “No obvious and overt activity should not be taken as a sign that nothing is going on.”

Parishes in Glasgow, Aberdeen, Edinburgh, the Western Isles and Inverness have joined the fellowship.  Ivor MacDonald of Kilmuir and Stenscholl Church in the Lochcarron and Skye Presbytery, said: “The proponents of homosexual ordination are pushing the Church on a rocky road. Their position is essentially a schismatic one.”  The fellowship’s covenant states that supporters “recognise God’s creation of humankind as male and female and the unchangeable standard of Christian marriage between one man and one woman as the proper place for sexual intimacy and the basis of the family”.  One minister in Glasgow, who asked not to be named, said: “The ministers in the north in particular are almost rebelling. They are talking of a breakaway at the meetings.”

It would be the largest schism in the Kirk since 1843 when a breakaway group formed the Free Church of Scotland after a clash over state intervention in the appointment of ministers The Free Kirk, which advocates male/female relationships, said while it would not wish to capitalise on the Church of Scotland’s crisis new members are welcome.  The Church, which said it is unable to discuss disciplinary breaches such as breaking the gagging order publicly, confirmed that at least one parish, which it refused to name, has indicated that it will withdraw congregational funding to the central Kirk.  Contributions from congregations are a key component of Church of Scotland affiliation and a move to withdraw funding is seen by some as the first step towards a split.

First of all let me make clear that I am not the anonymous minister from Glasgow.  I am not talking to the press. 

Secondly, as the minister of a church which has just voted to join the Fellowship of Confessing Churches we are not plotting to leave the Kirk: at least not yet.  We plan to stay and to argue for what we believe is Biblical orthodoxy in the matter of human sexuality.  If we leave, we don’t have a voice.  We have joined the FCC on that basis.  Our understanding is that the FCC gives like-minded congregations the opportunity to stand together in this matter.  Leaving the Kirk will be the last thing we do! Nor have we a policy of withholding funds. 

Having said that, we are not so naive as to imagine that our argument will necessarily win the day.  So evangelical ministers have been meeting to discuss what happened at the Assembly, how we are going to act during the course of the next two years, and what we might do post-2011.  No-one I know has made any definite plans to leave.

However, you might like to know that at one of those meetings, attended by nearly 200, it was stated authoritatively that before the Assembly the Scott Rennie camp had been in discussions with another denomination with a view to jumping ship should the decision go against him.  So please don’t point the finger at evangelicals and question our loyalty to the Kirk. 

Finally, let me encourage you to join the FCC.  The web-site will tell you all you need to know.

Hamilton bandwagon

It must be a quiet day for news stories because it turns out that the Hamilton Presbytery story is also in the Scotsman and the Times.  I’ve also had the Daily Mail sniffing around.  Guys – anything I have to say is on the blog alreday. 

For the sake of completeness, here are the other two links.

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/scotland/Kirk-faces-defiance-on-gay.5625406.jp

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article6825412.ece

The Herald story is still the most complete.  An unnamed friend/supporter of Scott Rennie is quoted as saying it is unfair to ask people to put their lives on hold for two years.  Exactly!!  That is why the Presbytery of Lochcarron and Skye wanted to send their Overture down under the Barrier Act.  Presbyteries would have discussed the issue and submitted their results by the end of December.  If the civil partnership debate is anything to go by we would probably have known the mind of the Church by mid-November. 

Instead, we have this two years of uncertainty.  Never mind anyone wishing to start training for the ministry; think about those who are already in training, who may be Probationers seeking a call to a charge.  They are the ones whose lives are really on hold. 

It all goes back to the Church’s refusal to make a decision in principle when we had the chance.  The Church decided not to decide.  It was inevitable, then, that personal cases should arise with all the subsequent pain.  The Ministries Council or their predecessors should have sought clear and unequivocal guidance on the matter from the General Assembly. 

By the way, it’s nice to see some new photographs of Scott Rennie being used.  Were they taken at the induction in July? 

Hamilton headlines the Herald

It has been a week since I posted the information about what happened at Hamilton Presbytery but the Scottish press have finally caught up—and how!  Front page of the Glasgow Herald.  Credit to Brian Donally.  He hasn’t just lifted the story from my blog but has actually done some work of his own.  I’m told he even called at Mr. Ross’ house.  It’s not often a journalist leaves his desk these days. 

One thing I can confirm.  The mood among evangelicals ranges from anger to despair.  I have received telephone calls and e-mails from ministers who really believed that the time of consultation could lead to a rejection of the ordination of homosexuals but who are no longer so optimistic.  If the Hamilton decision has done one thing, it has helped to disabuse some of the idea that the central church authorities are neutral players in all this. 

Kirk truce “well and truly trashed” in fresh row over gay clergy

Exclusive by Brian Donnelly

Published on 8 Sep 2009

The Church of Scotland has been thrown into fresh turmoil over its controversial ban on gay ordination after a man in a civil partnership was signed up to be a trainee minister.

In a move that will reopen ­bitter divisions, the third-largest presbytery in Scotland has agreed to nominate an openly gay man to begin training as a minister. This has led to critics claiming that a two-year moratorium on the appointment of homosexual clergy agreed at this year’s General Assembly of the Church of Scotland has been “well and truly trashed”.

Former lawyer Demetrius Ross is to begin a period of training during which he is expected to undertake a series of placements in a congregation.

The 42-year-old has been in the civil partnership for more than three years and is beginning theology studies at Glasgow University.

If ordained, Mr Ross would be the first gay minister to be admitted into the Kirk since the two-year moratorium was agreed at this year’s General Assembly. This followed deep divisions

over the appointment of gay ­minister Scott Rennie to a church in Aberdeen.

The move by Hamilton Presbytery comes after legal guidance on allowing gay theology ­students to begin study – originally understood to have been included in the moratorium – was clarified.

The Kirk said it had now established that no student should ­suffer prejudice by not being allowed to begin study, but there was no guarantee of a job after training.

It confirmed the guidance now being given to theology students but would not comment further, as the Hamilton decision can be appealed within 10 days and is considered “live”.

Some members of Lanarkshire churches were surprised by the move, and it is understood a number have given notice of their “dissent”, which dissociates them from the decision.

They also have the option to register a “dissent and complaint”, which could push the matter to the highest Kirk court, the General Assembly.

That could potentially force open in 2010 the debate that the Kirk halted this year in favour of having a Special Commission examine the issue and report back to delegates at the Assembly in 2011.

Edinburgh minister the Rev David Court, of New Restalrig, said: “It does seem to have broken the spirit of the moratorium. Questions have to be asked whether this decision will prejudice the outcome of the Special Commission.”

The Rev Ian Watson, of Kirkmuirhill, Lanarkshire, wrote in his blog under the heading RIP Presbyterianism: “One must ask the question, what kind of decisions relating to human sexuality are prohibited if nominating [a trainee] is not?”

He also claimed the spirit of the moratorium had been “well and truly trashed”.

One minister who supported Mr Rennie’s appointment, who asked not to be named, said: “We cannot ask people to put their lives on hold for years while we debate an issue that for many is simply a fact of life.”

Mr Ross is a former partner at Hamilton Ross law firm in Airdrie. His civil partnership was registered on December 31, 2005, the first entered in Airdrie registry office and one of the first in Scotland.

The Journal, the member magazine for the Law Society of Scotland, reported in June: “Notice is hereby given that Demetrius Ross (otherwise Dmitri Ross) has resigned as partner of the firm of Hamilton Ross, Airdrie.

“Mr Ross has decided to pursue his interest in the ministry and commences a Bachelor of Divinity (Ministry) at the University of Glasgow.”

The Kirk’s Ministries Council said: “It is important to emphasise that acceptance into the training process of the Church is never a guarantee of employment.”

The council added: “Following the decisions made at this year’s General Assembly, applicants may have concerns about the possible implications for the process of assessment and nomination.

“Our practice is that if any issues of lifestyle are mentioned by an applicant, these are noted by assessors and remain permanently in the notes of the applicant.

“The decisions recently made should ensure that no applicant will be prejudiced, between now and the General Assembly of 2011, in the decision of their Presbytery whether to nominate them.

“No-one can predict at this stage what implications that might have for those who are applicants, candidates, or serving in the ministries of the Church at that point.”

Mr Ross and Presbytery officials declined to comment.

Hamilton Presbytery revisited

Just to clarify my thinking on the legal side of what happened at Hamilton Presbytery.  I am arguing that the phrase “with respect to ordination and induction to the ministry” extends to training for the ministry.  Training for the ministry is “with respect to ordination”.  That is, it is preparing for ordination, it has ordination in its sights. 

My contention is that the spirit of the deliverance has been breached.  It was brought specifically “For the sake of the peace and unity of the church.”   Knowingly allowing practising homosexuals to train for the ministry certainly upsets the peace of the church.  It undoubtedly pushes the church further along the road towards open acceptance and endorsement of the gay life-style for her members and clergy.

Presbyterianism – RIP

One of the rare unifying moments at May’s General Assembly came as a result of an impassioned plea from Rev. Jim Stewart of Perth.  Sensing that the Assembly was of a mind to establish a Special Commission (leading to the two year consultation process) Jim begged Commissioners to recognize the pain and hurt and confusion of fellow evangelicals following the decision to find in favour of Aberdeen Presbytery.  Seconded by Rev. Dr. George Whyte (Presbytery Clerk of Edinburgh, who spoke in favour of Scott Rennie) Jim asked the Assembly to place a moratorium on the ordination and induction of practising homosexuals.  This would demonstrate that the Assembly really did want to give the wider Church the chance to express its mind on the issue, and that the outcome of the consultation process was by no means a foregone conclusion.  The deliverance, which I believe was passed without dissent (I may be wrong) reads:

Instruct Presbyteries to observe a moratorium on ordinations and inductions which might appear to prejudice the Special Commission before it reports.

 This followed on from the less specific original deliverance:

Instruct all Courts, Councils and Committees of the Church not to issue press statements or otherwise talk to the media or to make decisions in relation to contentious matters of human sexuality, with respect to Ordination and Induction to the Ministry of the Church of Scotland, until 31 May 2011.

Jim’s moratorium specifically extends to ordinations and induction; though it was argued on the floor of the Assembly that it was unnecessary in light of instruction to all courts, councils and committees of the church not to make decisions in relation to this contentious matter of human sexuality. 

This blogger has learned that last night the Presbytery of Hamilton (the third largest in Scotland) voted to nominate for training for the ministry of a man who is in a civil partnership.  I am told that this decision was made in the light of advice from our central Ministries Council.  The advice from the Council to prospective candidates reads as follows:

 Following the decisions made at this year’s General Assembly, applicants may have concerns about the possible implications for the process of assessment and nomination.

The assessment processes of the Ministries Council, and in particular at this conference, have not been affected by the Assembly’s decisions, and no-one should suffer any prejudice in any direction as a result.

Our practice is that if any issues of lifestyle are mentioned by an applicant, these are noted by assessors and remain permanently in the notes of the applicant.  The information does not affect assessment at the conference, but will become known to the Presbytery as a result.  Such information will be noted only if it is brought up by the applicant, as none of the questions asked in this conference are designed to elicit that sort of information.

 The decisions recently made should ensure that no applicant will be prejudiced, between now and the General Assembly of 2011, in the decision of their Presbytery whether to nominate them.  That Assembly will determine the Church’s position, on receipt of the report of the Special Commission that has been established under the convenership of a Scottish judge.  No-one can predict at this stage what implications that might have for those who are applicants, candidates, or serving in the ministries of the Church at that point. 

Applicants should bear these points in mind as they pursue their sense of calling and make practical decisions as a result of the Church’s processes and decisions.

It is important to emphasise that acceptance into the training process of the Church is never a guarantee of employment.

I have quoted the advice in full.  They are in effect saying that being a practising homosexual people is not a bar to training for the ministry.  One must ask the question: what kind of decisions relating to human sexuality are prohibited if nominating is not? 

And therefore one is left wondering what the point of the consultation process is.  If practising homosexuals are being accepted to train for the ministry, with all the investment of time and money that this entails for the Church as well as for the candidate, then it seems to me that those responsible for training are quite certain that the ordination of practising gays is just around the corner. 

It is this bloggers understanding that originally the relevant Presbytery Committee intended to advise the Presbytery to sist (ie. put on ice) the application until the end of the consultation period, but changed its advice on the night of the Presbytery meeting.  There is talk of pressure from 121 (our central offices) and of lawyers’ letters from the prospective candidate.  It seems to me that the spirit of Jim Stewart’s deliverance has been well and truly trashed; and the letter of the original ignored. 

So RIP Presbyterianism; your earthly term within the Church of Scotland seems to be drawing to a close.

For the confused

Some of you are saying that you can’t follow the thread of the Ron Ferguson discussion.  Ron’s replies are in the “comments” after the actual blog.

Anderson accuses!

A paper written by Rev.Dr. Robert Anderson has been doing rounds and causing consternation is some quarters.  If you haven’t seen it you can read it at www.blackburnandseafieldchurch.co.uk.  It’s under “Sermon of the Month”.  Robert gives his very critical analysis of how May’s General Assembly was run.

Ron Replies

Ron Ferguson has posted a very full comment on my “Open letter to Ron Ferguson” blog.  Like Ron I have no desire to keep this kind of correspondence up.  However, I am happy to post any reasonable and constructive comments from readers. 

Keep watching – I think next week may bring an interesting development in church affairs.