Comments: more on Southwark evangelicals withholding money

I seem to remember the late lamented Colin Slee, at the launch of Inclusive Church in Putney throwing down a similar challenge about Evangelicals withholding money. His challenge was simple - go on, then, withhold your money.....

Posted by peter kettle at Thursday, 17 May 2012 at 12:52pm BST

Sadly there is nothing new in this. The Diocese of Sydney, Australia's largest, has for decades declined to pay its full contributions to the General Synod because it doesn't like the ways I which they might be used.

Posted by Brian at Thursday, 17 May 2012 at 1:01pm BST

I must say that the imposition of a Holiness Code (reviving the ancient ideas of who is clean who is unclean) has always seemed like the unstated goal of the radical conservative push - but this statement, if accurate, seems to lay those cards right on the table. How that could be called "orthodox" when Jesus in word and deed rejected the holiness code of his day, is perplexing.

My firm belief is that the real disagreement is not over acceptance of gays, or women, or whatever. It is between a pre-modern worldview and a post-modern worldview. No amount of goodwill can reconcile this difference as it is functionally two different worlds.

I'm glad the Evangelicals (why do they get to claim this title?) are being this honest. But all the invitations to conversation and dialogue certainly die in the face of this statement.

Posted by Scott at Thursday, 17 May 2012 at 1:08pm BST

Welcome to The Episcopal Church experience, especially in the wake of +++Rowan's appeasement of bullies and ultimatum throwers. His own chickens have come home to roost. Until Neo-latitudinarians (as opposed to liberals) stand up for a broad inclusive church the fundagelicals will act out fhis notion that they are the only Christians.

Posted by Michael Russell at Thursday, 17 May 2012 at 3:07pm BST

Do these five retired bishops hold any licenses?

They should be removed.
If they mean what they say then this will mean no difference to them whatsoever, but it will put a distance between them and their actions and the Church of England.

Posted by Martin Reynolds at Thursday, 17 May 2012 at 6:15pm BST

"It is between a pre-modern worldview and a post-modern worldview."

Scott, I think this is a bit Manichaean. After all, there is an awful lot of similarity between the pre-modern and the post-modern world-view (if indeed you can generalise about such a thing, and surely it is a typically 'modern' characteristic to want to talk about such abstract confections as 'world-views' in the first place). Talking about homosexuality' at all looks pretty modern to me - the pre-moderns would have sex with anything, but they weren't big on such reifications.

Personally, I'm a big fan of the pre-moderns. Our Saviour was such a one! And there's certainly nothing especially commendable about having a contemporary 'world-view' (should we not try to have a Christian 'world-view'?). Nor do I actually think these Southwark evangelicals want to bring back the 'Holiness Code.' I don't believe their motives are quite that theologically advanced. At the risk of underestimating them, this looks very much like power-politics of the time-honoured sort. If these evangelicals occupy a strange moral universe, the problem is not that they are insufficiently modern. What hath Southwark to do with Jerusalem?

Posted by rjb at Friday, 18 May 2012 at 3:04am BST

I know people here are often using the word 'evangelical'to mean the conservative sort of evangelical but don't forget that most of us evangelicals deplore what this so-called Trust fund is doing. We rejoice in the Church of England's diversity even where we want to question somer expressions of it! Often the deepest opprobrium from the ConEvos is reserved for us other evangelicals (who are wosre than the lubruls as we should know better!)

Posted by Charles Read at Friday, 18 May 2012 at 10:45am BST

Just how many parishes are likely to be involved...I heard 10 at most. Often these sort of parishes have organised their financial affairs in such a way already, that it wont necessarily make as much difference as some might think. A propos Charles Read's comment :sadly true! I remember an anglo-catholic bishop saying to me some 15 yrs ago..."Of course they hate each other more than they hate the rest of us".Many Cons Evos seem increasingly embued with a profoundly sectarian ethos though I doubt if many would actually leave for ,as the old saying goes, the C of E is still the best boat to fish from.

Posted by Perry Butler at Friday, 18 May 2012 at 5:44pm BST

Seconding Michael Russell on chickens coming home to roost, which I said at the time when Rowan encouraged the ACNA and AMiA folks to believe that they might one day be a parallel province in the US.

June Butler

Posted by Grandmère Mimi at Friday, 18 May 2012 at 9:58pm BST

I was at a church meeting near here (in my Rural Dean capacity) in a prosperous small village (you know the sort of thing, big houses, 4WDs everywhere, everyone wearing Barbour). It was discussing the future of its church, and owned up to the fact that the total annual income for the parish was about 700 GBP.

Perhaps - just perhaps - this Southwark nonsense will be part of a general wake-up call. Serious stewardship is too often only seen among the ConsEv presence. If it is the case that a majority of Anglicans are not ConEv, then perhaps it's time to reach for the chequebook. Otherwise our beliefs are clearly not worth paying for.

Posted by david rowett at Saturday, 19 May 2012 at 10:18am BST

The St Matthias Day Statement (14 May 2012) is an update of the 1995 St Andrew’s Day Statement on homosexuality and seeks to help Anglicans understand their church’s teaching in the area of marriage and sexual relationships and its relevance today.

It does so by providing a five-fold summary of that teaching based in Scripture and Anglican tradition under the following headings:

1 – God’s love and call to love
2 – God’s Word and Church
3 – God’s gift of marriage
4 – God’s grace and call to holiness
5 – God’s people united in and by God’s word

As would be expected the statement takes a very high view of Scripture and is unambiguous about taking the whole of Scripture seriously.

I was particularly struck by the principles in section 2 which need far wider promulgation, especially 2b which addresses a major heresy in the church today.

The essential flaw of this heresy is that it tries to affirm ‘God is Love’ (I John 4:8) whilst ignoring ‘This is the love of God, that we keep His commandments’ (I John 5:3).

The commandment to love our neighbours (Exodus 19:18) cannot be used to justify sexual sin.

Posted by JJ at Saturday, 19 May 2012 at 7:54pm BST

David Rowett
you would make the same general observations if you came to my village. But the people actually coming to church are all retired (bar 2), on fixed income and only one of the retired people is paying income tax.

Posted by Erika Baker at Saturday, 19 May 2012 at 9:17pm BST

"The commandment to love our neighbours (Exodus 19:18) cannot be used to justify sexual sin."

You have already decided that a permanent homosexual relationship constitutes 'sin', so that particular line has a meaning quotient of nil, if you don't mind me observing.....

Posted by david rowett at Sunday, 20 May 2012 at 12:48pm BST

Where I come from (ACANZP), this sort of stewardship boycott is called 'Congregationalism', and has no part in the main-line Church. If such congregations wish to 'go it alone', they should surely opt out of the main-line Church provenance - certainly not call themselves 'Anglican'. They have already become a sect.

Posted by Father Ron Smith at Monday, 21 May 2012 at 1:08am BST

The St Matthias Day Statement (14 May 2012) is an update of the 1995 St Andrew’s Day Statement on homosexuality and seeks to help Anglicans understand their church’s teaching in the area of marriage and sexual relationships and its relevance today.'

wow 'their church has teaching' - who'd have guessed it? Only on gay sex though ?

Or shall I await with baited breathe 'their church's teaching' on the holy eucharist and its relevance today ?

Posted by Laurence Roberts at Monday, 21 May 2012 at 3:09pm BST

Apparently the Southwark Good Stewards have a new visual identity which depicts a cross on which hangs a collection bag as used in some parishes.

I believe that makes it clear who these schismatics really worship: Mammon.

Posted by Malcolm French+ at Tuesday, 22 May 2012 at 6:08am BST

I think the collection bag is meant to represent being good stewards of the money that is collected:
ie to fund support of the apostolic gospel rather than the revisionist one.

Posted by LondonVicar at Monday, 28 May 2012 at 6:43pm BST
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.