Thinking Anglicans

late January opinion

Nicholas Sagovsky writes in The Guardian The City of God and the City and asks “Where are the reminders of the City of God in today’s market-driven developments?”

Andrew Brown, also in The Guardian, writes The historical Jesus and asks “Just what, if anything, does the earliest source tell us about Jesus as he appeared to non-Christians?”

Giles Fraser in the Church Times writes Go back to controls for casino banks.

Looking forward to Candlemas Geoffrey Rowell has a Credo column in the Times: Simeon’s triumphal cry heralds the coming of the light. “The feast of Candlemas is the encounter of human longing and brokenness with the healing love of God.”

John Packer, the bishop of Ripon and Leeds, writes in the Yorkshire Post Don’t stop the many migrants who have enriched Britain.

8
Leave a Reply

avatar
3000
8 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
7 Comment authors
Göran Koch-SwahneDavid da Silva CornellFather Ron SmithJay VosLois Keen Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
Pluralist
Guest

I’m not sure what Andrew Brown has discovered or not discovered: what is his revision? What puzzles me is how people build up Jesus to be so completely normative, and then pile on to that more encrusted tradition for which they then play a game of orthodoxy. I watched the BBC new Review programme last night when the clericalised ex-singer in the Communards likened heaven to a good curry. He was struggling to find a place for all the usual constructions, but you could see he realised the game was up in that company and thus answered that his understanding… Read more »

john
Guest
john

‘In August 410, the city of Rome, which hadn’t been conquered in 800 years, was overrun by an invading horde of Goths.’ Nick Sagovsky is presumably regarded as one of the C of E’s big stars. Many of his public acts show him to be a virtuous person. Nevertheless, from an academic point of view, the end of this sentence shows shocking historical ignorance. Am I being pedantic and/or mean-spirited? I don’t think so. Such intellectual sloppiness (entirely avoidable with a little care) contributes to bringing Christianity into disrepute (as if there weren’t already enough Christians doing that). John Moles… Read more »

Jay Vos
Guest

‘In August 410, the city of Rome, which hadn’t been conquered in 800 years, was overrun by an invading horde of Goths.’

Almost verbatim from Wikipedia!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_of_Rome_%28410%29

Lois Keen
Guest

Wikipedia – not known as an acceptable first or primary source.

Jay Vos
Guest

Indeed, Lois…. that’s what I was hoping to convey; also that the writer of that article was lazy.

Father Ron Smith
Guest
Father Ron Smith

“The Lord has indeed come to his Temple, but the refining fire is the love that stoops down to the lowest part of our need. As Simeon cries out, this is “the light to lighten the Gentiles and the glory of his people, Israel”. He goes on to tell Mary that her child will fulfil the destiny of love, the destiny of sacrifice,” – Bishop Geoffrey Rowell – At Candlemass, we are reminded of Jesus being acknowledged as ‘The Light’ to enlighten the gentiles – that is, everyone; not just the originally ‘Chosen People of God’, but all peoples Bishop… Read more »

David da Silva Cornell
Guest
David da Silva Cornell

“…from an academic point of view, the end of this sentence shows shocking historical ignorance. Am I being pedantic and/or mean-spirited? I don’t think so. Such intellectual sloppiness (entirely avoidable with a little care) contributes to bringing Christianity into disrepute (as if there weren’t already enough Christians doing that).” Two questions: 1. Would Prof. Moles or anyone else care to illuminate the shortcoming in the Rev. Canon Sagovsky’s sentence? I, for one, simply don’t see it, unless the Visigoths are not to be considered Goths. 2. Whatever the alleged horrifying historical error may be, does it in any way invalidate… Read more »

Göran Koch-Swahne
Guest

Handbooks are nearly always what the professor’s professor’s professors believed once upon a time… The same goes for the Wikipedia. With the occasional mis-understanding added.