Dear Sir,
I wish to comment on your lead front-page article in the February 2020 edition of en and offer a modicum of redress in the interests of fairness and good dialogue. I have recently retired after 38 years of parish ministry in the Cof E, the last 20 being in the diocese of Chelmsford and therefore knowing all the nine years of Stephen Cottrell’s ministry as Diocesan Bishop.
I have been known and used as a leading conservative evangelical in the diocese. Across our acknowledged and perhaps widening differences, we have sought to maintain a robust friendship in our exchanges and dialogue – what Proverbs might mean by ‘iron sharpening iron’ which the late Derek Kidner describes as the ‘healthy clash of personalities and opinions’. To that end, may I pick up on two remarks in the article?
Bishop Stephen did indeed give a Presidential Address to the Chelmsford Diocesan Synod in early 2017 which was heard and commented on in different ways at the time and led to a significant meeting between the bishop and about 30 conservative evangelical leaders in the diocese. The bishop’s Address in part explored the ‘maximum freedom’ for inclusion that the Cof E allowed and encouraged at that time. He was not, nor did he think he was, wanting to change any rules or goalposts in the Church’s doctrine and practice. In the meeting with clergy, he freely admitted that anyone might reach a point where in conscience they felt unable to remain in the CofE and so, of course, could leave. He was not, nor did he think he was, saying that people should leave. However, on both occasions he was certainly heard to suggest changes in practice or to imply ‘should leave’.
When it gets to a stage when people dispute over what exactly was or was not said, it is very hard for anyone to come out well. Most of us have agreed to drop that dispute – issues over perception are hard to win. Bishop Stephen has in fact written to a few of the leaders of that group and offered an apology, if he was heard or perceived to say something he himself did not think he said or meant. The truth is Bishop Stephen is too much of an inclusivist to say what he is purported to have said – he is passionate that everyone has and must have a place at the table in the Church of Jesus Christ, and he has said again and again that he believes this includes conservatives as well as progressives. This must be hard for some of us conservatives to understand or accept. But that too is something of a matter of perception. Do we mean by inclusion a welcome in to the Sunday gathering and fellowship of the Church family, whilst others mean full involvement in the life and leadership of the Church?
I trust this goes behind some of the hopes and fears, and offers something more positive to debate than personal comment. I freely admit to being more of a dove than a hawk, perhaps especially these days, but I think I want to go with the Lord and His apostles and, if a fellow-Christian is at fault or in error, ‘warn him as a brother’ and ‘if he listens, win him over’.
Yours sincerely,
