Canadian interview with Rowan Williams

http://www.evangelicals.org/news.asp?id=650

[EV News] 18 Apr 2007--The Archbishop of Canterbury has spoken to the press in Canada about problems in the Anglican Communion.

A full record can be found on the Canadian website Anglican Planet.In the interview Dr Williams attempts to tread a fairly careful line in not wanting to support nor separate from the revisionists. He was asked some probing questions which again confirm his own position.

Q: How do you account for your evolution away from being inclusive of gay and lesbian people to now being actively opposed to their full inclusion in the Church?

A: Well that’s quite a pointed question, isn’t it? It’s partly an evolution of different kinds of responsibility in the Church. As a theologian and as a teacher for many years naturally I had the liberty to raise certain questions and to express personal opinions on the matter. As a bishop I have to keep people around the table in discussion on this. I’ve tried to say throughout that I’m strongly and consistently opposed to anything that suggests that gay and lesbian Christians are less than human, less than fully baptized, good faith members in the Church. The question is what are the forms of behaviour that the Church has the freedom and authority to bless? And for the Anglican Church that is not a question that can be settled by fiat means. What’s for the health of the Church? Can we maintain unity on this? Can we move ahead together in this rather than having different people finding different solutions?

Deep down as an individual he agrees with the ultimate aim being pursued by the revisionists. However, as Archbishop he has attempted to put forward not his own views but those of the Church. Therefore, for example, he does not argue that blessing homosexual relationships is wrong but rather that the revisionists are wrong to have gone ahead without agreement because there are strongly held views to the contrary. Whilst in some ways his position is laudable - subjecting his own views to the necessity of the post - it seems fairly clear that his appointment gave the green light to the revisionists because they knew he would find it difficult to oppose them in the way his predecessor had done.