David Runcorn Inclusive Evangelicals Counting us in – on doing numbers more honestly
Arwen Folkes Inclusive Evangelicals Swimming in the deep end …
Colin Coward Unadulterated Love How St Michael’s Basingstoke became an HTB plant
Mark Clavier Well-Tempered Whose Nave Is It Anyway?
David Runcorn does not understand statistics and so some of his argument is far from honest. The LLF ‘survey’ was qualitative and self selecting. It was not a representative poll which would give quantitative results. It was not therefore statistically significant. It would be like me doing a poll on Twitter about whether clergy could do statistics. Polling companies work very hard to find statistically significant representative samples. Anyone who knows anything about polling knows this.
I think you are being too judgemental, certainly judgemental in tone.. Most of his article was quite rightly sceptical about figures.
On the LLF survey, I don’t know the details, so won’t comment. I am a statistician and know about sampling.
I’m not sure, to be honest, whether sampling of views on LLF should be used to drive decisions. If changes are beneficial (which I think they are) they should be justified in their own right.
Amanda Robbie. The statistics here are not mine. I have accurately reported the summary, from source, of professionally analysed LLF survey findings. Your issue is with them – not with your assumption of my ignorance with numbers. This will give you more if you need it: https://cofe-equal-marriage.org.uk/llf-what-the-c-of-e-really-thinks/. I have to say your comments repeat attempts to discredit those findings at the time by those opposed to LLF. I was not convinced then and still am not now.
Hi David. (I have fond memories of your visit to our dilapidated curacy house in Wolverhampton btw). I hate misuse of statistics by anyone. A quantitative survey finds out what views are from different people but it *does not* find out how many in the population hold those views. When a survey is self selecting, it cannot represent the general population. And if you remember the LLF survey, it was mainly about your experience of the course, not about whether LLF needed to go further. And it was *certainly not* a representative sample of the Church of England. Just because… Read more »
You may be right in fact, but you were wrong to accuse David of dishonesty. Ignorance (if it was ignorance) is not the same as dishonesty.
Amanda – greetings to you and Neil – many years on. I have to say i continue to find your tone very strident – compared to your stated intention in your synod election address ‘to model generosity and gentleness as we discuss the details’. You are determined to deny any significance to the outcome of the most comprehensive theological and pastoral consultation the CofE has ever undertaken. I have to ask why? I refer you to Nic Tall’s comprehensive contribution to this discussion below.
As a mathematician, I agree with Amanda – however the results can be analysed, a self-selecting survey suffers from implicit bias in recording only the views of those who answer the survey. A random survey, or even better, a stratified random survey (with appropriate weighting) gives a far better picture. It is also important that any questions in a survey do not “lead” by their framing towards a particular point of view. But randomness is key first. I’d recommend for the layman Darrell Huff’s “How to Lie with Statistics” on the pitfalls of self-selecting surveys. [That is the mathematically untrained… Read more »
Thank you for your courteous and informed response here. This was a discussion that happened at length when LLF first published the results of the survey. It would help to know exactly what you mean by ‘random’ in the context of this church wide survey like this? Thanks.
Things are so polarised around LLF that anyone utterly opposed to any accommodation for LGBT+ relationships in the life of the church will cast doubt on any evidence that does not fit their narrative. My father was a Mathematics Professor and educational researcher. He always pointed out that no set of collected data was perfect, and every study can have questions asked about it. You have to look at the big picture across multiple studies, which present evidence rather than proof, something which his mathematical mind had to learn as in his mathematical world only 100% indubitably proved meant real… Read more »
I believe what can with considerable certainty be asserted from the responses to LLF is that support for change and the affirmation of devoted same-sex relationships is not marginal. In the end, the most reliable weighing up of people’s views would be a survey sent by central church to all people on all electoral rolls across the country. It would probably be less expensive to conduct than the money already spent, though having said that, it might be divisive. But the present General Synod system operates a bit like an old-style delegate system, where ordinary people in the pews are… Read more »
The Alliance “claimed to have over 2300 clergy signed up”. However, this group has declined to publish the names. While priests can sign up in a private capacity, if they are signing on behalf of their church communities then everyone should be able to know what is claimed for them. The fact that the signatures were private and provided as individual opinion means they cannot “claim to represent 42% of the Church of England’s average Sunday attendance”. That – to re-jig the old Bishop of Durham’s saying – is just “a conjuring trick with numbers”. The clergy who signed were… Read more »
I agree absolutely, so beautifully written.
David’s piece on numbers observes that the epistles never discuss the numerical size of churches and claims the gospels do not present grand and expansive metaphors for the witness of the disciples, but instead refer to them as eg salt, yeast, a single light. Of course the New Testament also includes Acts, chapter 2 of which records that about 3000 people were added to the church following an address by Peter, and concludes ‘the Lord added to their number day by day’. And the gospels do contain phrases such as ‘You are the light of the world. A city set… Read more »
Further, 2 Peter says ‘But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people’. And in Revelation John ‘looked, and behold, a great multitude which no man could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands, and crying out with a loud voice, “Salvation belongs to our God who sits upon the throne, and to the Lamb!”’ So it seems that the writers of the New Testament had experienced dynamic church growth and expected the… Read more »
Thank you. I have read the New Testament too. You are missing my point if you think that simply listing every place large numbers are mentioned in the NT you undermine my argument. To support my case I quoted Bishop Lesslie Newbigin – so you find yourself engaging with one of the greatest missionary theologians of the hundred years. I am confident he had read all those verses too.
I’m sure he did. My point remains that the NT authors expected the church to become large, and so when it’s shrinking it’s reasonable to explore how that might might be changed, rather than concluding that Jesus is entirely a God of small things and isn’t interested in numbers. At the end of the day the feeding of the five thousand wouldn’t have been as remarkable if it had been the feeding of the five.
I agree about ‘daily adding’ in Acts. But feeding the 5000 is not a story about a church – anymore than the multitudes in revelation. Where do the epistle writers ever discuss local church numbers.My point is not that growth is not desired or sought. It is related to Eugene Peterson’s concern about the way a focus on numbers distorts the character and calling of the church. It is not a guarantee the church is ‘doing it right’. I don’t think I have any more I can add, Thanks.
Yes, Acts has more on local numbers of course. A great number added to the church at Antioch in 11:21. Early church composition at Thessalonica is recorded in 17:4. Chapter 19 records growth at Ephesus – initially about 12, later a ‘considerable company’ there and throughout Asia.
Thanks David – I like the form of words or petition at that end of the Benedictine Prayers of Union ‘that we might grow in number and in holiness.’ I like the mutual stress: number and holiness. I also like the small little word ‘that’ which implies that if those making the intercession ‘love what he (Benedict loved) and put into practice what he taught’ then the result might just be holistic and overall growth. I appreciate and am grateful for your article.
And at the end of the feeding of the five thousand, as John’s Gospel tells us, they all got the wrong end of the stick.
After the people saw the sign Jesus performed, they began to say, “Surely this is the Prophet who is to come into the world.” Jesus, knowing that they intended to come and make him king by force, withdrew again to a mountain by himself.
The crowd’s reaction in John 6:14–15 suggests they were expecting a political messiah—one who would liberate them from Roman rule.
So good numbers attending, yes, but a misreading of the sign!
Another thought: In one of my churches we had 90 at a recent service (normally around 50) – it may not sound a lot, but we are a village parish of 500 residents. I would not take that as a judgement either way on our theology. The theology much the same as a neighbouring parish (also one of mine) with 10 to 15 regularly attending from a parish population of 800. The reasons for attendance figures are complex. Data can be absolutely vital if used well. It can test truth if that truth is something like the effect of vaccines… Read more »
Very much agree with your final point.
There is also this:
“Enter by the narrow gate. Wide is the gate and broad the road that leads to destruction, and many enter that way; narrow is the gate and constricted the road that leads to life, and those who find them are few.” (Matthew 7.13-14 REB)
Apparently Jesus is not impressed by numbers.
“The harvest is great, but the workers are few. Pray therefore to the Lord of the harvest to send out workers into his harvest”. Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.’ When he had finished speaking, he said to Simon, “Put out into deep water, and let down the nets for a catch.” Simon answered, “Master, we’ve worked hard all night and haven’t caught anything. But because you say so, I will… Read more »
I don’t think you can apply these texts in this way. The ultimate salvation is a multitude – Phil 2 has ‘every knee shall bow and every tongue confess’ and 1 Cor 15:22 has all brought to life by Christ. The missionary expansion of 115 years ago led to the claim of ‘The Evangelization of the World in This Generation’ with the belief that the vision could be made real in every nation by the middle of the 20th Century. We no longer believe that all will be in the visible church in our generation. We are more likely to… Read more »
Thanks Phil. This gives real substance to my concerns here
A further reflection on the significance of numbers relates to issues of power. Majorities are powerful – whether they are right or wrong, And even if they are right, the way they use power is itself a gospel issue. Jesus constantly challenged the powerful and risen up the weak’. The Magnificat celebrates reversals of power in the coming Kingdom. In the LLF pastoral guidelines that came with the study material there call particular and wise to ‘pay attention to power’. Quite apart from whether conservatives are right or wrong, I have real concerns about their use of their numerical and… Read more »
Just throwing a thought in here, for both David and Philip. Yes, some day every knee will indeed bow, and confess that Jesus is Lord – but is that necessarily the same as finding salvation? So much depends on how you read the passage and its context, which is that of Christ’s return and the ultimate day of judgement and separation. Those who are saved have already bowed and confessed but, as I’ve been taught to understand it, the many who haven’t only do so in the process of admitting their rejection and lostness. And, at that point it is… Read more »
I always thought the great number in white represented martyrs, so more the death of church members after persecution: “These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.”.
I’d take that as the writer reflecting on a large church being decimated by persecution, vast numbers of the dead, not the living.
The writer may be thinking of Jewish martyrs in previous generations I think
Colin Coward has done very important research. Specifics are so very important. We can talk in general terms about HTB but it is in the specific case of Basingstoke that we can see how chilling and dangerous HTB really is. I am a straight white man but I don’t want to worship in a church in which there are first and second class priests and first and second class human beings. But come the next General Synod, I doubt it I will hear a single voice calling out the moral and spiritual evil of HTB and the Alliance. The very… Read more »
“Evil”? That’s a pretty strong word. Like many others here I consider HTB to be wrong on many things. But based on my experiences of meeting and working with some of them (albeit briefly) I am also quite sure that their faith is genuine and they are sincerely trying to love God and love their neighbour and be better disciples. “Evil” seems a troubling word to apply to fellow Christians.
Can I raise a thought here? As I’ve just said, I was pretty thoroughly grounded in my faith’s basics by a college CU and early Fountain Trust ideas about commitment. And those ideas were pretty bluntly hard line in terms of what salvation/conversion actually demands. Yes, it is free – but it costs you everything. Personal ambitions, plans and hopes, even whether or not you marry or remain single are sacrificed at Calvary’s cross. And the last point, I should point out, applies to straights as well as gays. (Are Roy Hessian’s ‘Calvary Road’ or ‘Give Up Your Small Ambitions’… Read more »
Whose nave is it? It’s sacred consecrated space and should only be used for worship. I also know of a church which has had bawdy events for years and continues to do so. Even on its patronal festival. It continues with these events because they can. No-one can gainsay the will of the incumbent and PCC.
Is the nave consecrated? The secular use of the nave, while keeping the chancel “sacred”, has a long history.
If enough parishioners feel strongly, of course, they can elect different wardens and PCC members who share their views.
You might be interested in Canon F16, which expressly permits activities other than services of worship in a church or chapel. F 16 Of plays, concerts, and exhibitions of films and pictures in churches1. When any church or chapel is to be used for a play, concert, or exhibition of films or pictures, the minister shall take care that the words, music, and pictures are such as befit the House of God, are consonant with sound doctrine, and make for the edifying of the people. 2. The minister shall obey any general directions relating to such use of a church or chapel… Read more »
Mark Bennett – thanks for your response. It’s very frustrating because I’ve tried and failed to get the appropriate action done, in a situation where there’s ‘entertainment’ in a church, which categorically doesn’t befit the House of God, isn’t in the least edifying, no consultation with local or other authorities concerned with the precautions against fire and other dangers, indeed the church is a death trap should there be a fire. I’ve contacted many people but been ignored. When a bishop doesn’t think it necessary to reply, for example, does one wait for the inevitable disaster? Local council also not… Read more »
Have you spoken to the local fire brigade, if the building is that bad a danger? It may depend on where it is, but our local brigade take fire safety in public buildings very seriously
Go down and tell them. In your dressing gown.
{i’m just teasing. I have no idea what kind of entertainment you are referring to. Churches should always beware of offering any entertainment. Teasing again. Fire etc. is important.]
“It’s sacred consecrated space and should only be used for worship.”
But what constitutes “worship?”
“He who sings,” said St. Augustine, “prays twice.” Note that he did not restrict the songs to hymns or psalms.
Historically the nave of the church was common space and for many centuries functioned as a key gathering space for the wider community. It was only in the 19th century that the idea the Church building should only be used for worship arose. One of the tragic outcomes of course is that so many small villages today have both an under used church and an underused village hall vying for the same market. I saw this acutely as an acting Archdeacon in North Yorkshire where the person who worked half for the Diocese on the community use of churches was… Read more »
There is an over-supply of community spaces in both rural and urban areas. There have been a couple of occasions here recently when churches have closed for worship, and the cry has gone up that they should be “saved for community use”, without anyone having any sense of which community groups might wish to use them or where the volunteers might come from to maintain and manage the buildings. In the end, one of them has been demolished and the land sold, and the other was bought by a Nigerian Pentecostal group. But the over-supply of community spaces must call… Read more »
Not sure if this still applies, but I understand that at one time the nave was the parish part of the church, used for meetings, markets and other events. Things may have changed – but I don’t think I’d be happy with the church you mention!
I wonder if Colin Coward asked members of Basingstoke church what they thought God was doing, rather than whether they agreed with him about practices in teaching and worship. A member of that church recently posted “lapsed church goers returning, unchurched people walking in off the streets, saying that they suddenly felt they needed to go to church. Every week new people coming in across all the sites. God is on the move here.” There are places of worship where I feel like a creature from another planet, but if they are bringing people into living faith in Christ then… Read more »
God seems to have an extraordinary order of priorities. He’s allowed a devastating hurricane in Jamaica, not prevented terrible suffering in Gaza, Sudan and Ukraine. But at least He’s brought people off the streets to a Church which is abusive, unhealthy and manipulative. You’d think He’d have better uses of His time.
If God had prevented terrible suffering how would we know? And the intensity of the hurricane is directly related to climate change, due to our generation of carbon dioxide, so unless you have a solar-powered smartphone, both you and I are partially responsible for that.
I think we know God has NOT prevented terrible suffering in the places cited . Have you seen TV news lately? But you seem to think that He’s more concerned about attracting people to an unhealthy and abusive church. How do you know?
I avoid the TV news because I find it so depressing that it saps my motivation to alleviate suffering. So you want God to prevent suffering, you blame Him when it happens, but you aren’t prepared to allow that He might already have done so without fanfare – because after all ‘no hurricane today in Bermuda’ isn’t news. If you already despise God that much, then there probably isn’t much point having this exchange of views. Your other examples of suffering are all man-made (the ‘man’ is deliberate), so how far do you go with that? If you’d prefer to… Read more »
I’m aware God doesn’t prevent suffering. Nor do I despise God. Trump claimed God saved him from an assassination attempt. But He failed to save the life of the poor man behind him. What kind of theology is that? I am unable to accept your view that the Jamaican hurricane shouldn’t be news because no one died in Bermuda. Are you saying God spared Bermudians and sacrificed Jamaicans? You have a strange view of God. When nice things happen He performs them without fanfare. When tragedy occurs it’s not God’s fault. Very odd.
Precisely. People wedded to a theistic view of a God who intervenes from time to time in human lives, in big ways and in small, are necessarily highly selective in the actions attributed to him. Like people who say their “lost their faith” because their child died of leukaemia. But whose faith in a God who only let other people’s children die of leukaemia had been “certain”.
When tragedy occurs it is Gods fault, and when it doesn’t God isn’t to be given any credit. You have a strange view of God.
You mean God is to be credited when nothing happens. That simply shows God does nothing.
Abusive, unhealthy and manipulative according to the opinion of one person.
Abusive, unhealthy and manipulative according to the opinion of one person, who happens to be not just an experienced Christian priest but a trained, qualified and experienced psychotherapist.
I trust his judgement.
As I’ve reflected on my experience of worshipping in St Michael’s Basingstoke and the effects it had on me emotionally and physically at the time and subsequently, I know that asking members of the congregation what they thought God was doing would have been a good question. I know what I think they think God is doing and I know I have a different idea and I think the conversation would have become difficult. But this is all speculation. A member of the congregation recently posted something and I sat and listened to the Rector saying similar things in the… Read more »
I remember at University many years ago (the 1980s) some of the Christian Union group I knew said that a student leader at one of the Halls of Residence had “fallen away”. I went to see her to chat to her – she was still a Christian, she’d just disagreed with the way they were running things. “Lapsed”, “Backslider”, “Fallen Away” are very loaded terms, and we can tell nothing from them unless we engage in conversation. Unfortunately a top down imposition often fails to engage and listen. Assumptions—especially theological ones—can distort reality. The Christian Union labelled someone as having… Read more »
Young students can be idiots, older people are also not immune.
Some older people never grow up.
I am fully ‘fallen away’ lol.
I wonder if any research has been done on the leadership of university Christian Unions and where they are, say, ten years later? I remember a chap who had come to look at my church for architectural reasons. I discovered he had been vice chair of CICU….he said now he was nothing in particular, perhaps a sort of ” designer” Buddhist. Students aren’t idiots but most are at a period in their lives when they are exploring and sorting things out
When I was a student a CU member invited any member of the Theological Faculty to see him after the opening of term Service to see him afterwards if we wanted to become Christians.
I’m just re-reading a (1992) book edited by Kung and Moltmann which (among other things) examining why ‘difference’ cannot be tolerated within some circles within the Abrahamic religions. Despite its age, I find it resonates. One suggestion which I find interesting is that to permit divergence of opinion is to undermine the core belief that there is one simple, ‘correct’ hermeneutic which is plain to anyone of sufficient goodwill, humility and piety. To extend the title ‘Christian’ to someone whose hermeneutic differs would bring the whole philosophical house of cards crashing down. If that analysis is tenable, then there’s simply… Read more »
Thank you David. In my opinion this is a key understanding that so few people recognise. In a religion where salvation is firmly based on believing the correct thing (whatever that “thing” is) then for somebody else to believe a different thing to you and be equally saved is impossible. So anybody who believes a different thing to you must be ejected from your circle of believers, and be regarded as not saved. This is the problem with Christianity and its reliance on faith. Judaism, Hinduism and many other religions which base their religion on membership of a community, or… Read more »
The LLF process has never been a truly representative one. As Amanda Robbie has pointed out it was a qualitative process which within its limitations served some purpose. However, with less than 1% of all Church of England regular worshippers participating and the demographic of those participating being understandably skewed by the larger number of those with a vested interest participating it never could be truly representative. The other major problem with LLF has been is that throughout it has been trumpeted as being theologically based and yet we have now FAOCs view that stand alone services should be the… Read more »
If you hold the homophobic positions of the “Alliance” then perhaps the issue is that you don’t understand what homophobia is. If you support continuing discrimination against gay people and treating same-sex love as something fundamentally different to opposite-sex love you are, in fact, homophobic. You may think your homophobia is theologically justified but that doesn’t stop it being homophobia. It’s not “name-calling” to apply accurate descriptions.
War of words. Next people will talk about devilish Romish practices.
I am very relaxed about same sex marriages and same sex practising clergy. I don’t really care too much, there are much more important issues, such as humility, forgiveness, and the full armour of Christ.
However, it is obvious that same sex love is fundamentally different to opposite sex love, in that the latter can lead to procreation.
How significant that fact is, will differ between readers.
Don’t frighten the horses.
Nigel, Same sex love is very much the same as opposite sex love – and neither leads to procreation. Same-sex sex does not lead to procreation, but nowadays with contraception and many people being sexually active late in life, not a lot of opposite-sex sex leads to procreation either My husband David and I are married because we love each other. The fundamental call from God is towards love, and not sex. Can we please include love in the conversation. Those of us who are gay know that what makes us gay that we love somebody of the same sex.… Read more »
Same-sex love is not fundamentally different from other-sex love. Do couples beyond childbearing age, or those who are infertile, have a different love from those with children? You say readers will differ about your asserted ‘fact’. Your preposterous claim confuses love with biology. Love is love. Don’t frighten the horses.
Please don’t use words like ‘preposterous’. I was not asserting a fact, apart from the obvious fact that opposite sex sex can lead to procreation. That is hardly a matter for dispute. It is biology. I was challenging jo B’s assertion that if you consider same-sex love as being different to opposite-sex love, then you are necessarily homophobic. On a purely biological level, as you agree, they are different. As is clear from my comment, I was mainly focussing on the biological. Asserting such does not make one homophobic. Haven’t we been through all this with transgender issues? It is… Read more »
“Same-sex love is fundamentally different from other-sex love”. Who wrote that? You did. As a statement of ‘fact’ it is preposterous. How does not having a baby mean a gay couple’s love is different? It sounds homophobic to me.
You selectively quote. I added “in that the latter can lead to procreation.”
Jo B took the opposite view. Fair enough. But when somebody says two things are fundamentally the same, it is useful to try to identify any potential differences.
Differences do not make one or the other better, just different.
Embrace difference. Embrace uncertainty. Embrace discomfort.
I recommend Deleuze Differences and Repetitions.
I tend to be very careful in the words I use. When I say ‘can’ I do not mean ‘will’ or ‘must’. There are many forms of creation, procreation is but one.
If Dr Goodwin had said same-sex marriage is fundamentally different, rather than same-sex love, he would have a point. I have blessed and celebrated the Eucharist for gay couples, yet I ask if our doctrine, as we have so far received it, has the bandwidth for same-sex marriage. The impediment being Augustine’s third ‘good’: openness to the gift of children.
Thanks Allan. So often in these debates the definition of the words we use is important. Same-sex love is different to same-sex sex, is different to same-sex marriage. The interesting question for me is why we have had the bandwidth to set aside Augustine’s clear teachings on divorce and contraception within the goods of Christian marriage, but risk splitting the church on a disagreement about whether same-sex marriage is unacceptable due to lacking the same good. Yet through adoption or IVF many same sex marriages are gifted with children, and many opposite sex marriages are childless. According to Augustine such… Read more »
Gay people can be biological parents, gay couples can bring up children successfully. They are most definitely open to the gift
“the gift of children” is a phrase open to a more expansive way of receiving than a child resulting from a couple’s sexual intercourse. A couple who choose to adopt (heterosexual or same sax) will am almost certainly talk about the gift of their child. There have always been many ways of children being part of a family.
Same-sex couples can and do share in ‘the care and upbringing of children’ by adopting or fostering (I’m dodging the ethical minefields of donor insemination and surrogacy!), but as a matter of choice rather than an obligation which the Church sees as fundamental to the estate of marriage. Then there’s the analogy that’s been drawn between childless couples and same-sex couples. Although the former’s situation is consequential – a product of circumstance (e.g. age, infertility) – rather than essential in nature. LLF sees a more expansive way of receiving marriage’s third good: creating a culture in which those in need… Read more »
I would add that the HoB let slip a major opportunity in 2004 by not being more welcoming towards same-sex civil partnerships. But that was then and this is now. We have PLF, which when used in a stand-alone service might incur episcopal displeasure and which might, or might not, test canonical boundaries. But would any bishop be willing to make this a disciplinary matter given its contested nature and the likelihood of a legal challenge? The possibility of losing, together with the reputational damage, suggest not. I’m old-school enough to want to do what my Bishop asks me to… Read more »
That is such a tender and precious comment, Rosalind. Thank you. I think it can be hurtful and disrespectful to imply that only people who are able to procreate can have legitimate marriages. It ignores the amazing family life that adopted children can have, whether their parents can procreate or not. And it misses the point that actually it is LOVE that makes both marriage and parenthood precious. Gay couples are just as capable of LOVE and a loving home as any other couple. Adopted children are as much a gift as any other children. It’s the love and loving… Read more »
If the woman is past child-bearing age, or if either party is infertile, the Church sees their marriage as no less a marriage; likewise if a couple choose not to have children because this would jeopardise the mother’s wellbeing or risk passing on a crippling genetic condition.
In my world same-sex or opposite-sex erotic love and attraction will normally lead to a physical sexual expression, now or in the future, unless there is an explicit decision not to. So I don’t tend to make these fine distinctions. The world of separation between erotic love and sex is not a world I live in, nor is it a world God created (whilst of course a decision for celibacy is also a gift from God).. Love and marriage. Should a couple who have no mutual erotic attraction and love be married? Probably not. If they have mutual erotic attraction… Read more »
Nigel, in your world you don’t make a fine distinction between love and sex. And I agree with you. There is an immense overlap between the two.
Sadly Augustine did make that distinction, and the church has followed him, to the great detriment of so many people, both gay and straight.
And equally sadly, Augustine is so hard baked into Western Christian orthodoxy that it is difficult to suggest nowadays that Pelagius or Jovinian might have had a healthier attitude to sexual matters.
https://kylerhughes.com/2014/06/20/augustine-on-the-good-of-marriage/
“The impediment being Augustine’s third ‘good’: openness to the gift of children. ”
The gift of children need not be through procreation; ever hear of adoption?
I have – as did Augustine.
To be honest, I would much rather discuss Romish practices, than the continuing mud slinging going on at the moment. Let’s discuss adoration of Jesus’ Christ in the Most Holy Sacrament.
Yes, the accusations of homophobia were uncalled for and needed kick-back. Vigorously. Simon’s fear of being called a homophobe were justified. It is a form of bullying.
No it isn’t. Tone policing, however, is a form of bullying.
It is a bizarre mirror world in which you’re free to accuse people of bullying but not to point out homophobia.
Hear hear
I think that instead of ‘discussing it”, as has been done for centuries , we might well extend and deepen our practice of it.
You are right, of course.
FWIW, re numbers.
•7,500 Christians by the end of the first century (0.02% of sixty million people)
•40,000 Christians by 150 AD (0.07%)
•200,000 by 200 AD (0.35%)
•2 million by 250 AD (2%)
•6 million by 300 AD (10%)
•34 million by 350 AD (57%)
Those numbers can be deceiving. Constantine legalized Christianity in 313 AD, all but making it the state religion of the Roman Empire. (When the emperor endorses something, smart people rush to agree with him.) By 380, Theodosius made its status official.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=constantine+makes+christianity+state+religion
That’s something of a cliche. Constantine saw the vitality of Christianity and saw its unifying potential. That’s why he was bothered by arianism and called for the Council of Nicaea.The rapid growth and influence was well underway.
Julian’s efforts to set all this back failed miserably.
But the point in the context of this thread has to do with thinking growth is incidental — no, it is real and a genuine wonder, by the grace of God.
The total population of the Roman Empire is estimated to be 50-60 million people in 350 AD (a decline from its peak of 65 million in second century). So 34 million is, at best, about 50%.
“At best, 50%.” 57% or 50%, as you wish!
Theodosius also conducted a violent campaign against Pagan sites and worship, thus pushing people to become Christians. Not a nice man.
Interesting – where are these figures from?
The best treatment for general readers is Robert Wilken’s The First Thousand Years.
Is he in fact the source of these figures, which to me seem overconfident?In general I would recommend Peter Heather’s ‘Christianity, the Triumph of a Religion’ recently published
Wilken, First Thousand Years (Yale University Press, 2012) 66-67. I thought this a useful citation from Heather’s work, in a review. “When the Roman Empire collapsed, it was not inevitable that Christendom would survive. At the time, orthodox Christianity was fighting wars on two fronts: Islam in the east and Arianism within its own ranks. Nicene Christianity could easily have been stamped out, argues Heather, if not for the conversion of Clovis in the sixth century (193). Again, the public profession of faith by a civil magistrate kept the flame of Christianity burning in the West. Ambitious Christian magistrates, like… Read more »
Being born in a Christian country does not make you a Christian. Attending church every Sunday does not make you a Christian. Even being a Pope or bishop or priest does not make you a Christian. Counting numbers by only including the ‘known’ world is a good trick. I assume you know all this and are making the point that numbers are – well – just numbers. What are current numbers? Add all of UK, France, Spain, Italy, USA, Canada, most south American countries, etc. and you get a big number! I never know how to respond when people say… Read more »
“Attending church does not make you a Christian” is 21st century western modernity/interiority talk.
Thanks, David, for your discussion about numbers and the ways that they can be significant but also the risks that come with emphasising them in the wrong way. With experience of suburban parishes in London and rural parishes in the north west I have become deeply sceptical of the ways in which numbers are used to prove a point in the LLF debate. I know of several urban parishes in different parts of the country in which the clergy are supportive of the Alliance and its campaigns; but in each case there are those in the congregation who do not… Read more »
Thanks to Mother Arwen for her beautiful – if somewhat uncomfortable – reflection.
Yes, I found it insightful.
Sometimes I feel some Christians have never read the book of Job. Whatever we think God is, God is greater than that.
Well said … beautiful and challenging with a lovely and pertinent final paragraph