Former Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, discusses Homosexuality, Women, Scripture

01 February 2007 - Print Version

Source: Duke University

How do you understand the current debates in the church about homosexuality, unity and biblical authority?

All traditions, all denominations are having to face up to this issue of human sexuality. At the [worldwide meeting of bishops at the] Lambeth Conference, which I presided over in 1998 in Canterbury, there was a very remarkable resolution, which I was wholly in favor of, which expressed its view that practicing homosexuality was wrong, but we must listen to homosexuals and continue a journey together. That was overwhelmingly accepted. But then, of course, in 2003, the American church, The Episcopal Church of the United States, decided to break from that position and so Gene Robinson [an openly gay priest] was ordained bishop. That’s been the heart of the issue every since.  There are very strong forces on both sides, and I would also want to emphasize that there are good, noble people on both sides of the argument.  We should not demonize one another.

You opposed blessing homosexual relationships, but you were in favor of women’s ordination. Those two positions aren’t often held by the same person. How do you understand them going together?

I don’t see any problem whatsoever. On the one hand, the ordination of women is a very clear mandate in scripture, [which speaks] about women’s gifts being used in the church. I was working from that biblical premise and a theology of the equality of male and female. The issue of homosexuality is on a different basis all together. We are talking not about homosexuals being allowed or not allowed to be ordained. Of course, anyone can be ordained, but the lifestyle that’s required in scripture and in the Christian tradition is that ordination is open to either single, celibate men or a married priesthood. You can’t have a third order coming in. The ordination of practicing homosexuals throws up enormous challenges sacramentally about marriage, about [clerical] orders, about ordination itself. These are not easy issues to deal with.

You’ve ministered in many countries around the world. What lessons would you bring from Christians in other countries to Christians in the U.S.?

I would make two particular points. One is that the American church, in spite of the American bashing that goes on in some places today, is still widely appreciated for its generosity, support for the weaker churches, and so on…. But what we can learn the other hand is the sheer enthusiasm of the Christians who have very little in the way of materialism, materialistic objects and possessions, and their love of God is tremendous. In Sudan, to the see the poverty and to see the faith strident in the face of persecution, one always comes back home humbled by their dedication, their love, their singing, the joy that goes on, the spontaneity of worship. Sometimes our very professional, rather cold liturgy is shamed by that fervency and the dynamism and the suffering of these wonderful people. So there’s a lot we can learn from one another. They need a lot of our strength, and we need certainly some of their enthusiasm of life.

How did becoming Archbishop of Canterbury change your relationship with Jesus?

Many a time during my 11 1/2 years, I pinched myself and said, “What am I doing in a great office like this and meeting some many wonderful people around the world?”…. I’ll give an illustration. The first time I had an audience with the queen ..., I was driving back in my car—the back of the car, chauffer driven, back to Lambeth Palace—I was getting back to the next thing, and I suddenly thought, “Here am I, I’ve just met this amazing person Queen Elizabeth, and here am I going on to the next thing as if actually she didn’t matter.” So I learned the secret of simply mulling over and enjoying these opportunities and savoring them and reflecting on them deeply. But of course then the other side of this were the many, many thousands—hundreds of thousands—of very ordinary people, ordinary Christians who are getting on with the job. It was such a delight to minister to them and that informed my own personal Christian foundation and journey, seeing God at work in many different situations in many different parts of the world.

5 Responses. Comments closed for this entry.

Page 1 of 1
  1. Alice C. Linsley Says:

    I am disappointed in the way former Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, addresses the issue of the ordination of women. For him it may be a resolved issue, but for much of the Anglican Commmunion it isn’t. The ordination of women as priests is divisive. Many recognize that there is connective fiber between the ordination of women and the ordination of openly homosexual persons.  For ECUSA to accomplish the latter, it had first to break catholic orders by ordaining women as priests. The ordination of women as priests (deaconesses is a different matter) is another ECUSA innovation, unilaterally enacted and unkindly imposed upon those who uphold catholic orders.

  2. Lee Poteet Says:

    Mr Carey proved himself a functional illiterate in his discussion of the biblical issues around the ordination of women. The requirements clearly stated are “the husband of one wife” and “father” which rules out women entirely. The paganisms of the world into which our Lord came were full of priestesses so it was not an unfamiliar concept, simply one which our Lord rejected. While he had wonderful women disciples he included none of them among the number of his apostles just as the post-Pentacostal church included no women among those the apostles chose and ordained as deacons.
    Carey as a ‘baby bishop’ was made Canterbury because he was capable of being managed by the Church bureaucracy. He simply refuses to admit that he was duped and used.

  3. Alice C. Linsley Says:

    Well put, Mr. Poteet. Similarly, the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church is being used.

  4. Lee Poteet Says:

    Alice,
    I do not think that Mrs Schori is being used by anyone. The evil which she has done and is attempting to do is her own. I have met too many of her kind before and she, as they, think that anyone who fails to agree with them is either ignorant or something far worse.
    We know that she is capable of reading because of her university degrees, but those do not assure any of us of an ability to understand the consequences of her actions - or of her very thoughts. She believes herself to be a Christian and a far better one than those who reject her usurped authority. And that is the tragedy of the role into which she has been thrust. Yet she is free of her own volition to reject the path she has accepted and in which she walks. She simply will not do so!

  5. Alice C. Linsley Says:

    The spiritual blindness and arrogance of the TEC leadership in New York is astounding. In their waywardness they trample the faithful and spit on the Gospel. May the Lord have mercy upon them.