Michael Howard’s son tells how liberal Anglicans have thwarted his ambition
My attention was bought to this story by Dave Walker at the cartoon church. I suspect it was not the liberal anglicans that thwarted his ordination hopes but his inability to ‘play nicely with people’. Daily Mail News Story.
Ellen Loudon 
I agree. I read the article fairly quickly, but the image of him quietly refusing communion in the college chapel – in protest against the different views of others – is a vividly negative one. There are lots of Anglicans who are evangelical, if not the majority then certainly a very vocal group; but those who hold positions of authority within the ministry are likely to be those who can make a show of fellowship with others, even when they disagree with them. The same goes for liberals, of course.
Tim S
October 3, 2006 at 7:15 am
Such difficulty with embracing differences seems to me ultimately to deny the unity of the church, which is a gift of grace. It is difficult to see why he should want a sacramental ministry in a church whose sacraments he refuses. The comment “I wanted to do it in the name of the Church of England” also shows rather a misunderstanding of ordination. But ultimately his position is grounded upon the sin of pride. I suggest we all pray for him…
Bruce
October 3, 2006 at 2:48 pm
I’ve been worrying about the fact that my previous comment displays exactly the same sin of pride that I accused Howard of…I don’t think I retract anything, but I do submit to judgement.
Bruce
October 4, 2006 at 8:30 am
Bruce, I think I feel foul of the same sin. I have been quite troubled by this story – hence my repeating it here – and can’t quite get my head round my response to it. My first response ‘being thank goodness he didn’t get ordained’, my second being ‘but what of his calling’? and what of the man and his God? If you discuss this at Heresy tonight please let me know! Keep on praying…
Ellen Loudon
October 4, 2006 at 1:27 pm
This posting has distressed me and also challenged me since the offset. I found myself first reading the article sympathetically and was drawn to the ‘rocking the boat’ statement. Then i re-read it again and found that i was concentrating on viewing him as narrow minded and was drawn to the ‘unwillingness to listen’ and ‘views of others’ statements. I agree, although it is a shame, with the decision of denying his ordination. I am howether split with my opinion on this one. I do feel some desire to applaud him (this really distresses me as i do not want to think that i share his beliefs)but by simply making that statement i am assuming that my faith is somewhat ‘better’ or ‘more righteous’ than his therefore i have ‘stumbled’ at the same post as him.This really challenges me as i am questioning myself. Is there a buried part of me that actually agrees with him and of his ‘rocking the boat’? and also why does it feel so shameful to have to admit this? do i want to and actually believe in the ‘differences’ written about in this article? Am i from a positive viewpoint on homosexuality in the church? or do i just say and agree with whichever opinion seems the ‘correct’ one or the one which is ‘right on’ because the last thing we want people to think about us is that we are small minded and judgemental.
St. Claire of Toxteth
October 4, 2006 at 2:12 pm
I found this site from another site and I was drawn to this article.I too thought, “thank goodness” but I think it is right that we see the danger of the same thing happening in our lives (even if that is from the opposite viewpoint).I would describe myself as a liberal catholic but I have spent a lot of time in Evangelical settings and know many people who would call themselves Evangelical not sharing these same views.
Matthew McMurray
October 5, 2006 at 9:57 am