Comments: Faithworks on the SORs

Beautiful.

Posted by Cheryl Clough at Tuesday, 9 January 2007 at 9:23am GMT

ConsEvs blissfully looking forward to tonight's planned demonstration will doubtles dismiss this article as more faithless liberalism - but they should have a look at the ammunition which people like the Lawyers' Christian Fellowship has given Polly Toynbee in today's Guardian.

OK, Toynbee is journalism's answer to Dawkins, but she gets read and people believe that the Christianity she attacks is the only one on offer. Without more volume from groups like Faithworks, ConsEv's agenda will be the only one in the public field of view, and the only Christianity which will survive is that of the ConsEv variety, not because it is right, but because it has choked off other legitimate and ancient expressions of the faith. And this it will no doubt describe as 'fidelity to the Gospel'.

Anyhow, I shall now go off and continue the active undermining of the Christian faith around the parish......

Posted by mynsterpreost (=David Rowett) at Tuesday, 9 January 2007 at 10:02am GMT

But of course, it won't be "other legitimate and ancient expressions of the faith" that will be choked off, there are no such things. True Christianity(TM) died centuries ago and was only revived after the Reformation, when people decided that the Bible is where True Christianity(TM) comes from, doncha know. All that other stuff that people believed for 1500 years is just error brought about by "following the traditions of men" and thus sin and those of us who practice that kind of faith are all going to Hell anyway. My belief is that what is from God will not die, though it may not always flourish.

Posted by Ford Elms at Tuesday, 9 January 2007 at 12:02pm GMT

But whose fault is that, David? Its the fault of Williams the Spineless and his fellow Bishops who have not supported this legislation

Church of England liberals are simply too wet. They should be telling the evangelicals without compromise why they are wrong.

Posted by Merseymike at Tuesday, 9 January 2007 at 12:40pm GMT

'..but she gets read and people believe that the Christianity she attacks is the only one on offer. '

It appears to be the only version of christianity on offer in the C of E. I am not acceptable to that body as I am.

Posted by laurence at Tuesday, 9 January 2007 at 8:24pm GMT

20 cheers for Malcolm Duncan !
I hadnt heard of him or his organisation. I look forward to hearing much more.

Posted by laurence at Tuesday, 9 January 2007 at 8:25pm GMT

Really encouraging and, I must say pleasng statement.

Glad he has made it.

Hasn't shown an evidence of permeating thinking of a good many Christian groups who haven't been vocal in steering things in a reasonable way.

This statement ought to have been made by the Archbishop of Canterbury - or any one of the Anglican bishops - why didn't they?

We are now (and it seems only now) seeing even evangelicals starting to peel off from the excesses of the Lawyers Christian Fellowship and the Anglican (so-called) Mainstream, because they see that the politics of the religious right leads only to bitterness and dissension.

Much to ponder on within the Church of England whi ch has been guilty of the worst kind of abdication during this debate. If the public image of Christianity has been tarnished the established Church must bear a large burden.

Posted by Craig Nelson at Wednesday, 10 January 2007 at 12:36am GMT

though a bit of me would have liked ++Rowan and the entire sane hierarchy to have come out guns blazing against the sillier responses of some Christians, I recall wondering a few weeks ago whether his tactic was based on spotting the inconsistencies and tensions within the extreme conservative movements and waiting for them to begin their process of self-immolation.

No, we've not exactly covered ourselves in glory here, but perhaps the long game is to hold the middle together and wait for the extremists to throttle themselves.

I was struck by last night's (UK) TV: on the one hand, the Yahoos outside Westminster presenting an image of Christians always being 'against': on the other, the first in a documentary series on Helen House, the SLG-founded children's hospice in Oxford which showed committed Christianity in a VERY different light.

Posted by mynsterpreost (=David Rowett) at Wednesday, 10 January 2007 at 11:09am GMT

Yes, David. I was touched and encouraged by the Helen House programme. (I'd wondered if it was SLG --good on em), It makes christianity seem just possible.....

Posted by laurence at Wednesday, 10 January 2007 at 7:43pm GMT

Thank you for your responses to the statement and the ensuing debate and dialogue. I have received massive support from across the Christian spectrum, which is incredibly encouraging.

Now I think we must continue to discuss the issue of how we serve others unconditionally and not just restrict the debate to issues of sexuality.

One last thought on this is the fact that the Sexual Orientation Regulations for England, Wales and Scotland have not even been published yet so perhaps the aggressive tone and clear scaremongering should at least publicly acknowledge that the regulations have not even been put out for consultation yet on the mainland.

Something vaguely worrying about opposition to the 'unknown'. Perhaps that says more about our identity and confidence than anything else.

How, for example, do we serve and engage with people of other faith? Is there room for a values dialogue around human dignity, justice, freedom, service and love? Check it out http://www.buildingabetterworld.typepad.com

Thank you again for all of your kind comments. The debate continues on http://www.malcolmduncan.typepad.com

Posted by Malcolm Duncan at Friday, 12 January 2007 at 10:43am GMT

'..Now I think we must continue to discuss the issue of how we serve others unconditionally ... '

For such encouragement much thanks.

Hoping I can live up to it, and into it, in however small a way, myself ....

Posted by laurence at Friday, 12 January 2007 at 6:06pm GMT

The Lawyers Christian Fellowship makes some very good arguments and does not make some of the damaging arguments which Malcolm refers to.

Perhaps we should seal and heal this division in Christ and ask Malcolm and the LCF to work together on this issue in looking at the regulations for England Scotland and Wales and do our best to demonstrate a united Christian front displaying Love and Compassion, Inclusivity and Tolerance all within the biblical principles in which we believe.

Posted by Nigel Pierce at Sunday, 14 January 2007 at 10:33am GMT

Nigel
I should be most grateful if you can give me an example, or even two, of these "very good arguments" made by the LCF.

Posted by Simon Sarmiento at Sunday, 14 January 2007 at 1:06pm GMT

AN odd thought about the LCF. An ex-barrister mate of ours describes defending (successfully) those who had committed serious criminal offences. As counsel for the defence, his job was to do his best to ensure that justice wasn't done.

Now, this is part of the job, and apparently causes no problem of conscience. So how come they're getting all uppity about this problem of conscience, where they're not even required to lie on behalf of someone?

Seems a topsy-turvy world to me....

Posted by mynsterpreost (=David Rowett) at Sunday, 14 January 2007 at 3:02pm GMT
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.