Dear MNHQ, I didn't see all the problems kick off over poor Revjustabout...

Monkeytrousers, yes I have seen the thread.

But it's not newsworthy is it, Or of pastoral care it seems.

No, it is not true that anything a vicar says in public is the Official View of the CofE.

The CofE is a 'broad church' that allows for a huge number of views and opinions on just about anything. It does not have any Official View on day to day message board activities and if it did, only the Bishops or Archbishops are allowed to say it or to directly appoint someone else to say it on their behalf. Other than that, it's just a Vicar/Minister/Reverend doing what they do - talking with people. The Bishops know this. They even have their own blogs these days, y'know. So unless talking with people has become a banned activity, there is nothing amiss with a vicar talking on a message board about things.

The only time a Bishop would step in is if their Vicar has behaved in an appalling way - something to make front page headlines, not just trying to open up discussion on various faiths in a public place in a respectful and sensible way.

Can I ask, because I genuinely don't know, were there questions about Rev revelaing she is a REv rumbling before the PPH et al attacks?

Or are we only having this discussion beacuse of those nasty vitriolic completly unsubstantiated attacks?

I think that's important.

yeah, Justa as a representative of the church....

...has done a bloody marvellous job, and the church should (and no doubt is) proud of her contribution.

I only wish I could say the same about my contribution to MN as a Christian.

Oh and tortoise - I'm also not an anglican, so I may also be missing an obscure-and-probably-completely-incorrect bit of their canon law.

CreativeZen, you were the one who suggested you should leave. You were the one making the attacks. I didn't see why I should encourage you to stay when you were obviously so unhappy here. Of course if you flounced off, no-one would notice. Nothing to do with you being new, I've never before mentioned someone's newness to MN.

Just to reiterate, you are not happy here, so why stay?

So should no one reveal their professions on MN or then comment on thier area of expertise? Becacuse that is the logical conclusion of these arguments for her dropping the Rev.

Whether it's in your name or not is really a red herring here, it's poeple knowing it or not that is really the issue being argued.

MN would be a very poor place if this line were followed imo.

Sorry, should be clearer - as people, all Christians represent the church, but our views do not necessarily do so. It's probably a bit misleading to even talk about a single church view in a LOT of areas.

Do you think that the Church has a single view on something?

Do you really think that there is a single official line for the Anglican church?

Even Rowan has his persoanl view and his official one, but I think that his title remains the same none the less.

On most topics when two revs make the news, they're typically disagreeing - neither of them has the right to say that their views represent the church. How can they, when they don't typically agree?

All Christians are supposed to represent the church. Some believe that they are called by God to do this and are acknoweldged to by others in the church. There might be a difference in role, but there's no more or less a responsibility as far as I'm concerned. (With the caeveat that I'm not a good representative ... I really am a reluctant worshipper.)

tortoiseshell are you seriously saying then that she shouldn't let anyone know she is ordained and shouldn't run the reflection threads?

MrJustAbout, I'm afraid if she is posting as a Rev, and IS a rev, then she is representing the church's view. I am pretty sure that would be the church's position, and certainly the interpretation of many church-goers.

Befoire you remark on the "ministry" of justabout, perhaps you should actually read the reluctant worshippers threads. I'm not sure you've got the right end of the stick there at all.

I'm speaking as - unlike Custardo - someone who can't adopt a "TheRev" prefix without causing major confusion ...

I'm sure my wife is intentionally staying out of here. I don't know as I'm at work and checked before leaving (oh, was about 6pm - it's not anymore).

To reiterate what morningpaper has said, it's perfectly acceptable for a deacon in the anglican church to be "rev". Indeed, it would be very unusual and look odd for anyone post-woman's ordination not to be rev ... the only people I know of who are titled deacon as anglicans are women who were denied the ability to be priests earlier in life. (There are some rare cases where people are only ordained with the intention to be a deacon - I understand they normally only take deacon as a title as there's no intention to subsequently be a priest.) For what it's worth, I find the anglican church's number of different titles quite baffling, and anyone else in that boat has my sympathy.

My explosion on the thread which blew up was due to an argument that there was only one way to recognise the holocaust. My robust language - for which I apologise to the recipient - was because I was very angry about at the suggestion that anyone that who had family killed would be able to remember their names. As I'm in that position and can't (too many people dead, and those left really not able to talk), I felt that this went waay beyond what was acceptable ... it was a personally touchy issue and I swore. I regretted it, and asked for the post to be removed. As a man on a majority-female board where people have suffered some quite horrific domestic abuse it was not an appropriate action. I therefore also apologise generally to all those viewing it, and for subsequent references to it which may also cause offense and hurt. Provocation was not a good enough reason to call someone a b * * * * in here!

There was a suggestion earlier - and on the initial thread - that there should be a "health warning" on the religion board. I know that justabout thinks that it's a good idea (and has said so in here) because you don't know what loons are out there - we can all think of cases where people purport to be something they're not to general ill-will or ill-effect. Again, justabout did not do this - she used the title she is professionally entitled to use pursuant to her training & letters - given some of the threads she is involved in, anything else is probably a little misleading when she's posting on the r/p/s threads.

Please - everyone - ordination does not remove the ability to form one's own opinions and make mistakes. I know, I live with her!

Two points of clarification:

1. Someone above stated that she was a representative of the church. I really don't think she would make this claim - at least no more than anyone else who would class themselves in that particular body. She is someone who has been honest about her background though and feels that there are a lot of people here who could do with support. Whilst that's not unusual, she decided to be honest about her background and the oversight she receives because of this. Given that potential for additional problems that it can (for some appears to) cause, I think that's been proved to be wise.

2. Contrary to Eniddo's comment above, justabout did not claim that all posts were checked by the church. She did claim that she received supervision. A supervisor is an overseer, not a checker of each item. As such, she was not making false claims.

I think it would be nice if some of the discussion just simmered down a bit. From MY perspective, in the longer term very little about names matters too much and I don't think we should get too worked up. (I would say that, as I don't really believe in 'professional' ministry!) Getting rl contact with a threatening overtones is survivable too, although it's still very unsettling and I would ask that we see no recurrence!

For anyone who wants to judge the quality of my wife's posting, this weeks' reluctant worshipper's thread was about adultery . Just be aware - username notwithstanding - that she's a reverend and not that reluctant a worshipper .

so it's just an amazing coincidence that your concern about the Rev using this title, and the attacks on her, have coincided then Justine?

Don't patronise us by expecting us to belive that.

This 'suggestion' to the Rev is a result of these threads attacking her.

Can you assure us that you wre going to ask the rev to do this anyway, before these attacks started?

I find being expected to belive in coincidences such as that, and that PPh just happened to appear on the gaza thread at the same time as Enid, as ludicrous.

By asking Rev to change her name directly after these attacks, suggests I'm afraid that she has been somehow complicit in them or asking for it.

And yes, I said it before, and I'll say it again, I find that sort of capitualtion to malicious attacks, shameful and weak.

And you can wink all you like about it.

Wannabe, I'm no expert on the church, but getting promoted to a Vicar, Reverend whatever wouldn't mean immediately getting assigned a parish would it. Anyway I think Rev is still the lower rank rev.

And why am I defending Rev ffs? because while of course all religion is fake you can still get nice religious people and she seems to be one of them.

although I don't imagine there is any legal comeback, I do think that religious people look to a religious authority for guidance, and therefore would perhaps be more likely to seak guidance from someone who was a legitimate rev than someone who had read the bible and thought they knew all about it.

Therefore if the rev proved to be a fake, it might shatter their reality somewhat?

How utterly charming. "Close the door on the way out."

Is Mn only for people who agree with each other? I posted my impression of this site. I have visited other areas and have posted there. However it is worrying that, should I question someone on something they have said/claimed, I could be accused of harassing them. If I reveal that I post on another closed site (which I do and several email lists), will I be required to fuck the fuck off??

So is this my welcome? If I, as someone looking for a friendly, helpful site, indicate that this thread, and apparently others, make this site appear to be bitter, etc., I am merely shown the door?

I've said this before - a Christian seeing an area as their 'ministry', simply means an area in which they feel they are serving - you know, generally being kind, loving, truthful and all that sneaky Christian stuff.

In that sense, I've seen MN as one of my areas of ministry for ages. Like many of my other areas of ministry (my family, my actual church, my local community) it gives back to me too. I very much doubt Justa sees things any differently (you know, like a psycho maverick vicar, picking up unknowing congregants as she goes...)

and the reflection threads ime are great.

right to question tortoiseshell, not right to attack and be abusive.

No one worships her WW for goodness sake.

ok look justabout posted as justabout for ages. then i was talking to her offline and said it was a shame there wasn't an online church run by someone like her. Then she thought about the Reluctant Worshippers topic, where she asks a different Mnetter to lead a reflection each week. these have been very good and have included reflections by Lulumama and SGB, and have brought many people into very interesting discussions.

Plenty of ordained people don't have a congregation/parish at all times.

I don't think she has said "Mumsnet is my ministry!" but (like any christian would) she sees it an extension of her ministry - and as she is in the ordained ministry (or in similar therapeutic environments), if she is worried about advice she is offering she will discuss that with her supervisor

Deacons don't have congregations - that is a job for a few priests and they are usually referred to as incumbent parish priests

They also often do other things such as study leave etc.

Wannabe the Reflection threads are just that - reflection rather than debate. They are there for all to read if you are confused.

I agree with you, wannabe. Sometimes I'm very surprised at how some MNetters seem to worship others. It's bizarre. Would it happen in RL?

And I didn't see what happened to Rev either. Was it mean? There's a lot of mean on MN too but a lot of great folk.