Why the CoE must be a broad church when it comes to new Bishop of Sheffield
by Arun Arora, Yorkshire Post:
[…] Writing in these pages earlier this week, the Reverend Professor Martyn Percy implied that those who support the appointment of Bishop Philip North as the new Bishop of Sheffield, and the Church of England’s settlement on enabling women to be bishops were akin to those who held apartheid era racially-segregationist views. Following Professor Percy’s logic that means he is suggesting the Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu, as good as holds racist views. So much for thoughtful and reflective views.
That astonishing implication goes to the heart the issue with Professor Percy’s argument. It’s not so much that he doesn’t make out a case but rather that those who disagree with him must be labelled in such a way as to make holding an opposite view morally unacceptable. By presenting his arguments in such terms where is the room for reasoned and balanced debate? Or, to put it another way, when did it become acceptable for academics to start playing the man and stop playing the ball?
Professor Percy is at pains in his article to suggest he thinks Bishop North is a good man and the argument is not personal. Well, if someone told me that I should resign from my job because my views were effectively sexist, I think I’d take that rather personally. Taken as a whole, Professor Percy’s argument goes beyond stating his own view to requiring someone else who holds a different view to either agree or resign.
The nomination of Philip North as the next Bishop of Sheffield was made within the frameworks and processes agreed by General Synod in 2014. Many, if not all, of Professor Percy’s arguments were heard and considered by Synod before being rejected.
Related Posts
Tags
Share This
