ACNA 5th Provincial Council underway at Nashotah House
 |
| Archbishop Duncan address the Provincial Council. |
I am here in Wisconsin – first time in Wisconsin – for the 5th Provincial Council of the Anglican Church in North America. The meeting at Adams Hall is standing room only and it’s been uplifting to see so many from so far come together to share mission and ministry. Great to see the visitors that are here as well. Stay tuned for updates!
It is my first time in Wisconsin – growing up in the Navy did not present an opportunity to live in the Mid-West. In fact, the only time I went to the Mid-West was when I was 12 when we moved from Charleston, South Carolina to San Diego, California and camped our way across country. My dad’s great-grandparents used to own a summer home in the northern part of Michigan which I have pictures of through the years when my dad visited as a child, but I have been in this part of the country. Flew into Milwaukee yesterday. The meetings are taking place at Nashotah House, an Anglican/Episcopal seminary. It is in a lovely setting with lots of woods and lakes and fields surrounding it. A contemplative place, it is a great environment to have a council such as this.
Update: New dioceses have been omitted into the ACNA and voting is underway for new members of the Executive Committee. You can see photos here and here.
Posted by webmaster on June 19, 2013
http://fcasa.wordpress.com/2013/06/19/acna-5th-provincial-council-underway-at-nashotah-house/
Pope Francis writes to David Cameron on G8
A few weeks ago David Cameron wrote to Pope Francis about the G8 leaders’ summit in Lough Erne, setting out his agenda for the global economy. He promised to maintain ring-fencing of the Overseas Aid budget (0.7% of GNI) and work toward ‘the common good’. He wants ‘fairer taxes, freer trade and greater transparency’. He advocates trade liberalisation, open markets, bilateral trade deals and less protectionism. He criticises ‘poor rules, corrupt practices and weak capacity’. Much of it, indeed, could be taken as an attack upon the EU.
The Pope has now replied:
LETTER OF HOLY FATHER FRANCIS
TO H.E. Mr DAVID CAMERON, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER
ON THE OCCASION OF THE G8 MEETING (17-18 JUNE 2013)To The Right Honourable David Cameron, MP
Prime Minister
I am pleased to reply to your kind letter of 5 June 2013, with which you were good enough to inform me of your Government’s agenda for the British G8 Presidency during the year 2013 and of the forthcoming Summit, due to take place at Lough Erne on 17 and 18 June 2013, entitled A G8 meeting that goes back to first principles.
If this topic is to attain its broadest and deepest resonance, it is necessary to ensure that all political and economic activity, whether national or international, makes reference to man. Indeed, such activity must, on the one hand, enable the maximum expression of freedom and creativity, both individual and collective, while on the other hand it must promote and guarantee their responsible exercise in solidarity, with particular attention to the poorest.
The priorities that the British Presidency has set out for the Lough Erne Summit are concerned above all with the free international market, taxation, and transparency on the part of governments and economic actors. Yet the fundamental reference to man is by no means lacking, specifically in the proposal for concerted action by the Group to eliminate definitively the scourge of hunger and to ensure food security. Similarly, a further sign of attention to the human person is the inclusion as one of the central themes on the agenda of the protection of women and children from sexual violence in conflict situations, even though it must be remembered that the indispensable context for the development of all the afore-mentioned political actions is that of international peace. Sadly, concern over serious international crises is a recurring theme in the deliberations of the G8, and this year it cannot fail to address the situation in the Middle East, especially in Syria.. In this regard, I earnestly hope that the Summit will help to obtain an immediate and lasting cease-fire and to bring all parties in the conflict to the negotiating table. Peace demands a far-sighted renunciation of certain claims, in order to build together a more equitable and just peace. Moreover, peace is an essential pre-requisite for the protection of women, children and other innocent victims, and for making a start towards conquering hunger, especially among the victims of war.
The actions included on the agenda of the British G8 Presidency, which point towards law as the golden thread of development – as well as the consequent commitments to deal with tax avoidance and to ensure transparency and responsibility on the part of governments – are measures that indicate the deep ethical roots of these problems, since, as my predecessor Benedict XVI made clear, the present global crisis shows that ethics is not something external to the economy, but is an integral and unavoidable element of economic thought and action.
The long-term measures that are designed to ensure an adequate legal framework for all economic actions, as well as the associated urgent measures to resolve the global economic crisis, must be guided by the ethics of truth. This includes, first and foremost, respect for the truth of man, who is not simply an additional economic factor, or a disposable good, but is equipped with a nature and a dignity that cannot be reduced to simple economic calculus. Therefore concern for the fundamental material and spiritual welfare of every human person is the starting-point for every political and economic solution and the ultimate measure of its effectiveness and its ethical validity.
Moreover, the goal of economics and politics is to serve humanity, beginning with the poorest and most vulnerable wherever they may be, even in their mothers’ wombs. Every economic and political theory or action must set about providing each inhabitant of the planet with the minimum wherewithal to live in dignity and freedom, with the possibility of supporting a family, educating children, praising God and developing one’s own human potential. This is the main thing; in the absence of such a vision, all economic activity is meaningless.
In this sense, the various grave economic and political challenges facing today’s world require a courageous change of attitude that will restore to the end (the human person) and to the means (economics and politics) their proper place. Money and other political and economic means must serve, not rule, bearing in mind that, in a seemingly paradoxical way, free and disinterested solidarity is the key to the smooth functioning of the global economy.
I wished to share these thoughts with you, Prime Minister, with a view to highlighting what is implicit in all political choices, but can sometimes be forgotten: the primary importance of putting humanity, every single man and woman, at the centre of all political and economic activity, both nationally and internationally, because man is the truest and deepest resource for politics and economics, as well as their ultimate end.
Dear Prime Minister, trusting that these thoughts have made a helpful spiritual contribution to your deliberations, I express my sincere hope for a fruitful outcome to your work and I invoke abundant blessings upon the Lough Erne Summit and upon all the participants, as well as upon the activities of the British G8 Presidency during the year 2013, and I take this opportunity to reiterate my good wishes and to express my sentiments of esteem.
From the Vatican, 15 June 2013
FRANCISCUS
There is in this correspondence prima facie agreement on much common ground. But David Cameron’s understanding of Roman Catholic social teaching is a world away from the Pope’s. “Catholic social doctrine talks about taking care of those who can’t take care of themselves, people who need help,” US Vice-President Joe Biden explained last year. For him, it’s all about social justice. For his then opponent, Paul Ryan, the preferential option for the poor remains one of the primary tenets of social teaching, but it means you ‘don’t keep people poor, don’t make people dependent on government so that they stay stuck at their station in life’. Roman Catholic social doctrine compassionately sustains poverty – it fails the poorest. David Cameron wants the poor to take responsibility for their indolence and inaction. And so does Roman Catholic reformer Iain Duncan Smith.
IDS is a Christian, and his mission is evangelical: he sees things rather as Margaret Thatcher saw them – as a battle between good and evil, and the problem is sin. Of course, he can’t easily say so because all hell would break loose. But he is intent on renewing society, and you do that by renewing the heart of man, and that is easier the earlier you captivate the heart. And he is clear on the limits of government:
“The government can check the signals, but most of the intervention is done by the voluntary sector, private organisations, people who have proven programmes that work. You don’t want some official trying to descend from on high and intervene. We’ve been doing that for years, and it’s all gone wrong. I’m talking about intervention, but on a programme based around local communities. Government doesn’t do this. It can pave the way, set up the structures.”
He said back in 2011: “We care more about our society than we do for the political party. I don’t care if I’m attacked for it. I want to get Britain right — to me that’s more important than actually having a political spitting match.” And that’s undoubtedly true for Pope Francis, too.
But it’s curious – is it not – that the Prime Minister has not corresponded with the Archbishop of Canterbury on this matter. Surely, with all his manifest experience in business and consideration of ethical finance, he would have had a contribution to make?
Posted by webmaster on June 19, 2013
http://fcasa.wordpress.com/2013/06/19/pope-francis-writes-to-david-cameron-on-g8/
Update from Canon Chris Sugden, Church of England
The Same-Sex Couples bill is now under scrutiny at the committee stage in the House of Lords. The first of three days of debate 
took place on Monday. The second will be on Wednesday. No votes will be taken at this stage until the Third Reading of the Bill. A number of amendments have been tabled. Two diverging views are whether, on the one hand, there is some enhanced legal relationship for people in society, of any gender, but that the term marriage should be reserved for the man/woman monogamous relationship, or, on the other hand, that all people should have the same civil union, with additional religious extras for those who wish them. In the latter case, marriage would be abolished.
took place on Monday. The second will be on Wednesday. No votes will be taken at this stage until the Third Reading of the Bill. A number of amendments have been tabled. Two diverging views are whether, on the one hand, there is some enhanced legal relationship for people in society, of any gender, but that the term marriage should be reserved for the man/woman monogamous relationship, or, on the other hand, that all people should have the same civil union, with additional religious extras for those who wish them. In the latter case, marriage would be abolished.
Christian and church teaching has always insisted that as a creation good there is only one kind of marriage. One challenge for the church is if marriage is changed to include two people of any gender, clergy would refuse to conduct any marriages as registrars on behalf of the state because of the penalties to be imposed if they refuse those of the same gender.
It has been reported that the Government is planning to respond to concerns about conscientious objection by changing the Public Order Act so that it would be clear that people will be protected who want to express their belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman. But this only applies to the sort of Speakers’ Corner situation (where any views may be expressed) rather than institutional support.
A group of parents and professionals launched a new websitewith an advert in The Times on Monday to point out ten reasons why gay marriage would be particularly harmful to the wellbeing and rights of children. These are:
- Intact biological families provide the gold standard for the wellbeing of children.
- Children have a human right to be nurtured by both their biological parents.
- Gay parenting by definition denies the child from having one or both biological parents.
- Popular support for the Bill is based on the unfounded theory that people are ‘born gay’.
- All school children will be taught that as adults they can have marriage relationships with either men or women.
- Adolescents commonly experience temporary same-sex attraction: this does not mean they are gay.
- There is no evidence that SSM strengthens marriage. In Spain marriage rates fell precipitously.
- Behind this Bill is a militant move to deny gender difference.
- ‘Equal love’ leads to unequal marriage.
- Civil partnerships already provide all the legal and financial benefits of marriage for gay people.
Some listening to the debate in the Lords have noted that those arguing for traditional marriage tend to keep the debate at such an abstract, cerebral level that for many, nothing lands. When there is a comparison between the lovely gay couple next door and abstract notions of justice, the former wins, hands down. Concentrating upon the damage to children as in the concerns above gets attention!
There is increasing evidence of horror stories from children coming home saying they are gay, or being traumatized by sexual ‘health’ lessons in schools which have focused attention on gay erotica to such a degree that in one case, the 14 year old did not want to hug her mother or see her sister in the bath. In nurseries, even, children are being ‘gayified’. However, such evidence is dismissed as extreme, anecdotal and a one-off, while evidence of ‘gay bullying’ is used to demand a national campaign.
There have been sympathetic noises from the Prime Minister’s Office to the amendments being proposed to provide for protection for teachers, registrars (which obviously includes clergy) and others. There is a question however of the Parliamentary arithmetic as to whether Labour and Liberal Democrat peers will allow them through. If they do not, there is a potential for the Parliamentary Process to be drawn out beyond the Government’s planned timetable.
The Joint Committee on Human Rights which numbers some senior liberal legal Lords, has made a very critical report on the drafting of the bill. For example, the current drafting does not require those involved to be consensual. It would be unusual if such criticisms did not translate into further amendments.
Already, to avoid late-night ambushes when those voting purely at the Government’s behest might have gone home, the Government has extended the Committee stage to a third day onJune 24th.
Posted by webmaster on June 19, 2013
http://fcasa.wordpress.com/2013/06/19/update-from-canon-chris-sugden-church-of-england/
A Third Issue
Dear Friends of the Anglican Realignment,
I note with approval that the federal judge who received the South Carolina case from the Episcopal Church (TEC) has remanded the case to state court. TEC wanted the federal court to preempt the South Carolina state court system and rule favorably on the claims of TEC to all things pertaining to the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina, their charter, seal, insignia, etc. Instead, the judge ruled that the case belonged in state court. This does put TEC in a more difficult position because the South Carolina Supreme Court has previously ruled that the Dennis Canon and the concept behind it are null and void. This state court ruling will be a guide for the courts that will now hear the litigation and make a decision.
Also noted is the papal acknowledgement and concern that a gay lobby (perhaps, since this is in Italy, we should say gay mafia) is deeply embedded in the Vatican Curia and high levels of governance. When there is a problem, the first step in finding a right way forward is acknowledging that the problem exists. Removing all those leaders whose moral conduct contradicts Catholic moral doctrine and teaching would be a first step in cleaning house. I suspect that Pope Frances is the strong yet gentle man to take on this task; may God empower him with both wisdom and courage to see this through.
Within the larger Christian community, and indeed within Anglicanism itself, there are some issues that divide denominations, communions and families. You may be familiar with some of the issues, and may have had to deal with them firsthand in your own family, workplace, or church. One issue is the ordination of women to Holy Orders. Both sides feel they have convincing arguments, and it is difficult to find a middle ground. Another issue is sexuality, and primarily homosexuality, and how this is dealt with for membership, communion status, and for ordination.
A third issue is one you may not have heard of or encountered, but it does play a role in church teaching and conduct. This issue is a modern replay of the reformation era theological arguments, usually termed Calvinism and Arminianism, after their founders John Calvin and Jacob Arminius. Both theologies are soundly based on Holy Scripture, but focus on different aspects of the salvation story, and seem to be contradictory to one another. Although Calvinism has much to say about many things, and without doing full justice to Calvin, I would say that it focuses on the Sovereignty of God, and that everything else falls under that. Arminianism focuses on the free will of mankind, and on the acceptance or rejection of God’s grace in our life. The Sovereignty of God requires God to be omnipotent, and omniscient. The concept of predestination arises out of this, as does double election, that is, God has already chosen who will respond favorably to him and be saved, and those who will reject him and his Grace, and face destruction. The Arminians, on the other hand, believe in the Sovereignty of God, but they also believe that men and women have the freedom to choose for or against God, otherwise they won’t be legally responsible for their actions, and it would be unfair for them to be consigned to destruction if they had no say in the matter.
If you start with a human who has free will, having the ability to choose for or against God, and allow a large measure of God’s grace preeminently invested into the individual, it would seem that God is left waiting around to see which way the human will decide, and that doesn’t agree with God being all-powerful. John and Charles Wesley as Anglicans taught what seems to me to be a fairly Arminian doctrine. In the recent past, Presbyterians taught Calvinism and predestination, while Methodists following the Wesley line taught Arminianism. Baptists fell into both camps. I’ve seen plenty of “First Baptist this” or “Second Baptist that” churches, but then I’ve also seen “Free Will Baptist” churches, and surprisingly I’ve even seen a “St. Paul Baptist” and a “St. John Baptist” churches. I’ve wondered what the last two might teach, but haven’t taken the time yet to visit.
Anglicans can fall into either camp, and how they sort their theology out on these subjects will usually be reflected in their attitude toward ministry and life. I understand the need for God’s Sovereignty to be upheld, but I also think that God didn’t intend to make us all into automatons, and that in his all-powerfulness, he chose to voluntarily set aside his all-powerfulness in order to give humankind the free agency to make decisions, to sin, and to make choices that take us away from him. That decision on his part did necessitate God coming to earth in human form in Jesus Christ to bring the grace of God to the battlefield of life, where the for-or-against-God decisions are being made by men and women. I have noted that a weak man cannot be a meek man, for a weak man has only weakness to rely upon, but a strong man, strong in faith in God and with God spiritually equipping him, can choose to be meek. Jesus, who could actually have called upon legions of angels to fight with him as a man of great strength, chose to be meek and accept what was inflicted on him because he was grounded in God, and in fact was God the Son.
I think at some point later on, when Christ has gathered us together for eternity, the seeming dichotomy between the Sovereignty of God and the freedom of the human will shall be reconciled and both shown as true. I want to believe that I shall see a day when faithful Baptists and Methodists, Presbyterians and Anglicans, and others as well, will all be together in God’s presence, perhaps astonished at who is or isn’t there. I have only touched lightly on this serious and heavy subject, but perhaps some of you might wish to read up on the Remonstrance of 1610 and the Synod of Dort, and start to wrestle with some of these concepts which are actually still alive and live underneath some of the issues we have to deal with.
Please remember that God isn’t through with you, ever. He remains deeply caring about how each of your days go, and the decisions that you must make. He has time for you if you will take time for him.
Blessings and Peace in Jesus Christ our Lord
+David
The Rt. Rev. David C. Anderson, Sr.
President and CEO, American Anglican Council
Posted by webmaster on June 19, 2013
http://fcasa.wordpress.com/2013/06/19/a-third-issue/
African Anglicans Say Gay Bishops Affirmation ‘Shatters Hopes of Reconciliation’
By Stoyan Zaimov , Christian Post Reporter
Anglican leaders in Africa have expressed their outrage over the Church of England’s decision to approve gay bishops in its order, saying that the decision could put an end to hopes of healing broken relationships in the Communion.
Archbishop Nicholas Okoh of Nigeria, one of the world’s largest provinces of the Anglican Communion with 17 million members, said that the affirmation of gay bishops “could very well shatter whatever hopes we had for healing and reconciliation within our beloved Communion,” Reuters reported.
Okoh added that the Church of England has given into “the contemporary idols of secularism and moral expediency,” and that it is “one step removed from the moral precipice we have already witnessed in The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church in Canada.”
Last week, the House of Bishops of the Church of England announced that it had internally decided to allow gay clergy to serve as bishops if they promise a life of celibacy, even if they are in a same-sex civil partnership.
Posted by webmaster on June 19, 2013
http://fcasa.wordpress.com/2013/06/19/african-anglicans-say-gay-bishops-affirmation-shatters-hopes-of-reconciliation/
Seminarians from 17 countries meet Abp Welby and ACO staff
The seminarians have been working, worshipping and fellowshipping together
Photo Credit: ACNS
By ACNS staff
Anglican seminarians from countries including India, Madagascar, Nigeria and the USA were in London today to visit Anglican Communion Office (ACO) staff and the Archbishop of Canterbury.
The visit is part of a Seminarians & New Clergy course, run by Canterbury Cathedral, which focuses on the rich traditions of cultures and contexts of mission and ministry in the Anglican Communion.
Guided by an international faculty, students are encouraged to share their own experiences of the Anglican Communion and reflect on these against the background of the life and worship of Canterbury Cathedral.
The conference has two pillars: academic input and group reflection on ordained life and ministry, and participating in the pattern of prayer at the cathedral.
The group first visited the Anglican Communion Office where they learned more about its work and spent time in Bible study and worship with the staff there. They then travelled on to Lambeth Palace to meet with Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby shortly before he travelled to Rome to meet with Pope Francis.
One of the seminarians, Jason Wright from Australia, said of the course that they were “building bridges across boundaries”.
“We talk about the Anglican Communion,” he added, surrounded by brothers and sisters from across the globe, ”this is first time I have really experienced it.”
The full list of the participants’ countries is:
Australia, Canada, England, Ghana, India, Jamaica, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, New Zealand, Nigeria, South Africa, South Sudan, Tanzania, USA, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
ENDS
Posted by webmaster on June 18, 2013
http://fcasa.wordpress.com/2013/06/18/seminarians-from-17-countries-meet-abp-welby-and-aco-staff/
Archbishop of York: would the church rather bless sheep and trees than gay couples?
The Church of England will have to think about whether it is right to bless sheep and trees but not loving gay couples, its second most senior figure has suggested.
Dr John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York, said it will have to answer the “big question” of blessing civil partnerships and whether they have 
been “given enough space” within the church.
He said the issue of unions between gay couples is a “matter which will need to be discussed” in a hint that the Church could be open to a major shift in its position when its review of sexuality reports back later this year.
Dr Sentamu made the comments in a debate in the House of Lords on the Government’s new laws legalising same-sex marriage, which he argued were an “abuse of language”.
The Archbishop, who said he is “on the mend” from treatment for prostate cancer, backed to an amendment that would differentiate between “traditional marriage” and “same-sex marriage” in the new laws.
Churches will be exempt from having to marry gay people under the new laws. However, Dr Sentamu said the legislation is would still cause “ideological damage” and likened politicians to “ill-prepared midwifes at the birth of a new institution”.
However, he also signalled the Church could review its attitude towards blessing gay couples in future.
“What do you do with people in same sex relationships that are committed, that are loving, that are Christian?” he said.
“Would you rather bless a sheep and a tree but not them? That is a big question to which we are going to come and the moment is not now. We are dealing with legislation as we’ve got.”
Although the law was recently changed to make it possible for churches to perform civil partnership ceremonies, they are still officially banned in the Church of England whose rules also prevent priests performing formal “blessing” services for same-sex couples.
In practice scores of unofficial blessing services for civil partnerships already take place in churches and cathedrals every year.
And with many senior figures basing their arguments against gay marriage on the belief that civil partnerships provide “equal” rights, they have come under growing pressure to give them the church’s formal approval.
Such a change in policy would require the backing of the General Synod which next meets in York next month.
A motion on civil partnerships is listed for possible discussion but is not expected to be given time because of the debate on women bishops.
Most discussion on such issues has effectively been put on hold until the end of this year when a commission on sexuality, chaired by the former civil service mandarin Sir Joseph Pilling, reports to the Church.
The Church of England has effectively accepted that gay marriage will become law despite its reservations in light of large majorities in both houses.
However, the legislation has still not passed through the House of Lords, where many peers spoken against the laws last night.
Baroness Williams, the Liberal Democrat peer, emerged as a surprise supporter of an ammendment which would downgrade gay marriage to “unions” between same-sex couples.
She said: “In my view, marriage has been for a long time the foundation of family life in this country and elsewhere. In that case, I believe that it is indeed a framework for procreation and the raising of children.”
Contrasting the length of time it takes human beings to grow up with that of other animals she said: “The evidence from social workers and psychiatrists suggests — I will not put it more strongly than that — that it looks as if a marriage between a man and a woman is probably the best and most stable basis for raising children that we have so far invented.”
She said that her own gay and lesbian friends displayed some of the deepest commitment she had ever seen but added: “We need different descriptions for what are essentially different commitments.
“Equality is about equality of respect and equality of dignity, I strongly support it and I have done all my life,” she said.
“But equality is not the same as sameness – that is the fundamental mistake in this Bill.”
Posted by webmaster on June 18, 2013
http://fcasa.wordpress.com/2013/06/18/archbishop-of-york-would-the-church-rather-bless-sheep-and-trees-than-gay-couples/
Obama: Banning late-term abortion shows ‘contempt’ for ‘the Constitution,’ assaults women’s rights
By Ben Johnson, LifeSite News
President Barack Obama has announced that, if Trent Franks’ bill to restrict late-term abortion nationwide passes, he will veto it.
In a Statement of Administration Policy, the president called the “Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act” (H.R. 1797) “an assault on a woman’s right to choose” and said it shows “contempt for…the Constitution.”
“The administration strongly opposes H.R. 1797, which would unacceptably restrict women’s health and reproductive rights and is an assault on a woman’s right to choose,” he said. “This bill is a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade and shows contempt for women’s health and rights, the role doctors play in their patients’ health care decisions, and the Constitution.”
He contended his administration is working to “minimize the need for abortion” by “expand[ing] access to contraception,” a reference to either the HHS mandate or his decision to allow the abortifacient Plan B to be sold over the counter to minor girls without a prescription.
Just last week, White House spokesman Jay Carney refused to answer a reporter’s question about the president’s view of the abortion ban, saying on that Obama “has been absolutely clear about where he stands.”
Posted by webmaster on June 18, 2013
http://fcasa.wordpress.com/2013/06/18/obama-banning-late-term-abortion-shows-contempt-for-the-constitution-assaults-womens-rights/
Kirk could lose £1m a year over gay ordination
By Brian Donnelly, Herald Scotland
THE Church of Scotland stands to lose more than £1 million a year in givings as congregations begin resigning from the Kirk in the row over gay ordination.
The first wave of resignations has seen six congregations quit, with half of the parishes in the Kirk’s financial heartland. The controversy could have a bigger impact on Kirk coffers as more are expected to follow over the next two years.
In Edinburgh, Holyrood Abbey Church worshippers give £215,000 a year, New Restalrig gives £114,000 and St Catherine’s Argyle collects £196,000, while Gilcomston South in Aberdeen, brings in £300,000 a year and on Lewis the Kinloch and Stornoway churches bring in £210,000 between them. In total, the Kirk brought in £60.5m in givings in 2011.
It is understood that wealthier traditionalist congregations who depart may offer less well-off parishes help if they wish to leave.
The developments came as father and son ministers said they would leave the Church over the move to allow congregations to ordain gay ministers made at its May General Assembly, despite the decision still having to be ratified. Rev David Randall of Ayrshire has followed his father Rev David Randall Snr of Logie St John’s in Dundee in becoming the latest to say publicly that he will leave.
“I have always just felt it seems they are willing to pursue this liberalising pro-gay agenda regardless of the cost and it is emerging the cost is going to be very high. That is inevitable. There have been warning voices over the last three or four years that have just been ignored. It’s very sad.
Posted by webmaster on June 18, 2013
http://fcasa.wordpress.com/2013/06/18/kirk-could-lose-1m-a-year-over-gay-ordination/
Fatherhood transforms men. But only if they live with their kids
By W. Bradford Wilcox, Slate
[...] fatherhood is transformative for men’s bodies and their lives—if they manage to live with their children and the mother of their children. Of course, we’ve known about the transformative power of parenthood, since time immemorial, for women. Now, we’re learning more and more about the ways that fatherhood is also transformative for men’s bodies and lives, as my new book, Gender and Parenthood: Biological and Social Scientific Perspectives (co-edited with Kathleen Kovner Kline), points out.
For many men, the transformative physical power of fatherhood first manifests itself when the pounds start piling up. One recent survey found that the average father puts on more than 10 pounds while waiting for baby to arrive.
But there are more significant transformations afoot than weight gain for many men. Studies suggest that after the arrival of a baby men’s testosterone falls, while their prolactin levels rise. These hormonal shifts are significant because testosterone is associated with aggression and heightened libido, whereas prolactin is associated with heightened levels of parental care. Taken together, these hormonal shifts seem to prepare men to settle down, steer clear of attractive alternatives, and engage their children. Or, in psychologist Anne Storey’s words, this new research “suggests that hormones may play a role in priming males to provide care for young.”
But these hormonal changes don’t just happen for any father; they appear to be most likely for men who are living in a long-term relationship with the mother of their children; indeed, our book reports that men’s hormonal changes move in synchrony with their partner’s hormonal shifts when they live together. Moreover, research by anthropologist Peter Gray indicates that drops in testosterone are most pronounced among men engaged in “affiliative pair bonding and paternal care,” i.e., men who are married to and living with the mother of their own children. Fatherhood, then, appears most likely, or only likely, to prime men physiologically to settle down when they are living with the mother of their children.The importance of physical proximity, when it comes to fatherhood, may help explain why the sociological story about fatherhood is remarkably similar to the biological story. Fatherhood is socially transformative for men—but only, once again, if they are living proximate to their children. By contrast, men who don’t live with their children, either because they never married the mother in the first place, or got divorced, often don’t look much different than childless men. Three findings illustrate the point:
Posted by webmaster on June 18, 2013
http://fcasa.wordpress.com/2013/06/18/fatherhood-transforms-men-but-only-if-they-live-with-their-kids/
