A large part of me wishes the C of E really would split into Inclusive Church and let the rest go, doubtless to keep splitting into splinter groups. The growth (or otherwise) of the respective groupings would be interesting to watch, probably have to disestablish first!!
I’m 100% on the side of those wanting the church to change its teaching on sexuality. I think that we officially discriminate against gay people in a way that we should not. But, unless I am misunderstanding something, the bishops’ recent statement is simply acknowledging the reality that this change requires a two thirds majority in Synod which is currently not possible. So the traditionalists blocking this are right that this is the only route to make such a change. They may however be wrong- I believe they are wrong- on the much more serious question of what our official… Read more »
Are you “open to the possibility that you might be wrong” about “the complete trustworthiness of scripture”? You criticise a category of churches for thinking they know the truth and then you say with what seems to be some certainty about the truth yourself that their beliefs about Scripture are unfounded. It doesn’t seem to be certainty about being right that separates you from them.
Yes, I am open to the possibility that I may be wrong. Uncertainty is a characteristic of a liberal faith. Are you saying that you agree that we should all be open to the possibility that we may be wrong? If we were, LLF would be approved.
I would also say that it seems to me that the onus of proof is on those who assert something as bizarre as the “complete trustworthiness” of the canon of scripture, which seems to me little more than superstition.
If scripture isn’t completely trustworthy, does this cast some doubt over our ability to discern ‘dominical priorities ‘? Unless there is some other, superior key to discovering the ‘real’ significance of Jesus. What could that possibly be?
Of course there is “some doubt” over “dominical priorities” – as there is over any assertion over the teaching of a figure who lived 2000 years ago, cobbled together from large number of scraps of ancient texts which is what lies behind your nice neat leatherbound Bible. You’re right: I did write that loving one’s neighbour was “unquestionably at the heart of what it means to be a follower of Jesus” because I didn’t think anyone would question this. Do you wish to question it? The reality is that we edge closer towards what we hope is the truth over… Read more »
Thanks. That aligns very much with the teachings I got at student evangelical Christian unions and the round church under Mark Ruston.
No, Cambridge evangelical Christian scientists did not go around believing the literal story of the creation. Nor did evangelicals in the theology department.
Peter Dodkins
20 days ago
The CofE is the Established Church of, in and for England, under the Crown. Synodical Jurisdiction has been delegated by Parliament, much like any other Executive Agency, but with the purpose that it might also have offered arms-length moral guidance to the Sovereign Authority. It has failed, and the Church has become a No-Go Area for the People of England and the Will of Parliament. It needs Suspension, while a Judicial Review investigates it’s Public Service, Employment Practices and Charitable Status. The Malcontents need to be shown the door (and hand the keys back where necessary) – as they have… Read more »
I thought it was God’s Church?
Or are you having a bit f a tease?
All that legal stuff would sit well with the Pharisees but seems a long way from Christ’s teaching.
Last edited 19 days ago by Too old to genuflect
Nigel Goodwin
19 days ago
I’m not sure how much further theological advice will change anything. The problem is not a lack of theological advice, analysis, investigation, discussion, workgroups, prayer.
The problem is that there is no unity on the theology, on this or many other theological issues. To think theological unity might be gained is a fantasy.
Certainly expressions and actions of love, and a halt to pettiness, would help. On all sides.
Will disagreements ameliorate? Or is drastic change required?
Are positions maintained because of fear? How does Jesus create freedom from fear?
“If I permit two people of the same sex to marry in my church, *I* may go to Hell” certainly sounds like fear.
Simon Holdaway
19 days ago
I have sent an email providing links to Mark Oakley’s sermon and David Montieth’s article to my bishops in Southwell and Nottingham. I added that I felt deeply ashamed about the bishops’ response to LLF. I wonder if they will reply?
Bishops not rtelying to heartfelt letters is not only pastorally outrageous but also simply rude. Those who receive no reply should tell them so, it is about time people stopped being so deferential to them and said it as it is.
Anglican in Exile
18 days ago
I know there’s been a lot happening recently, but the Durham Report on Pilavachi doesn’t seem to have been referenced at all on these pages unless I’ve missed something. It’s so relevant to the LLF debate, as MP was the poster boy for charismatic evangelical celibate singleness and the undisputed model for successful orthodox outreach to young people. The silence from all sides is deafening, particularly from those who championed him. Incidentally, I notice that New Wine is looking for a new chair of trustees, anyone know any more as to why the recently appointed present incumbent is leaving so… Read more »
Funny you should mention the Durham University report into Soul Survivor . I was thinking the same thing. Stephen Parsons has written an excellent article about it in ‘Surviving Church’ – maybe this could be linked on TA by someone clever enough to do this?
The Durham report is independent of the Church of England and listens to the harm Soul Survivor did to young people involved with Pilavachi so it would be quite a challenging read for the Control Freaks of the organisation engaged in keeping the lid on and pretending it was just a little blip
Dave
17 days ago
This, from Bishop Walker, the old guard Bishop of Manchester I find simply appalling – grossly insensitive and so out of touch with his own diocese. Why bother to even say it, it does more harm than being silent would. https://www.manchester.anglican.org/llf/
The Dean of Salisbury preached this sermon on Sunday 26 October:
https://www.salisburycathedral.org.uk/a-terminal-uniqueness/
A large part of me wishes the C of E really would split into Inclusive Church and let the rest go, doubtless to keep splitting into splinter groups. The growth (or otherwise) of the respective groupings would be interesting to watch, probably have to disestablish first!!
Thanks to Mark Oakley for an amazing sermon.
The Dean of Southwark speaks words that we need to heed. Thank God for his courage and also of those of the Dean of Salisbury
A Terminal Uniqueness – Salisbury Cathedral
I’m 100% on the side of those wanting the church to change its teaching on sexuality. I think that we officially discriminate against gay people in a way that we should not. But, unless I am misunderstanding something, the bishops’ recent statement is simply acknowledging the reality that this change requires a two thirds majority in Synod which is currently not possible. So the traditionalists blocking this are right that this is the only route to make such a change. They may however be wrong- I believe they are wrong- on the much more serious question of what our official… Read more »
Are you “open to the possibility that you might be wrong” about “the complete trustworthiness of scripture”? You criticise a category of churches for thinking they know the truth and then you say with what seems to be some certainty about the truth yourself that their beliefs about Scripture are unfounded. It doesn’t seem to be certainty about being right that separates you from them.
Yes, I am open to the possibility that I may be wrong. Uncertainty is a characteristic of a liberal faith. Are you saying that you agree that we should all be open to the possibility that we may be wrong? If we were, LLF would be approved.
I would also say that it seems to me that the onus of proof is on those who assert something as bizarre as the “complete trustworthiness” of the canon of scripture, which seems to me little more than superstition.
If scripture isn’t completely trustworthy, does this cast some doubt over our ability to discern ‘dominical priorities ‘? Unless there is some other, superior key to discovering the ‘real’ significance of Jesus. What could that possibly be?
Of course there is “some doubt” over “dominical priorities” – as there is over any assertion over the teaching of a figure who lived 2000 years ago, cobbled together from large number of scraps of ancient texts which is what lies behind your nice neat leatherbound Bible. You’re right: I did write that loving one’s neighbour was “unquestionably at the heart of what it means to be a follower of Jesus” because I didn’t think anyone would question this. Do you wish to question it? The reality is that we edge closer towards what we hope is the truth over… Read more »
I like C.S. Lewis’ take on the ‘trustworthiness of scripture’.
https://tachesterton.wordpress.com/2014/04/01/c-s-lewis-on-the-bible-2/
Thanks. That aligns very much with the teachings I got at student evangelical Christian unions and the round church under Mark Ruston.
No, Cambridge evangelical Christian scientists did not go around believing the literal story of the creation. Nor did evangelicals in the theology department.
The CofE is the Established Church of, in and for England, under the Crown. Synodical Jurisdiction has been delegated by Parliament, much like any other Executive Agency, but with the purpose that it might also have offered arms-length moral guidance to the Sovereign Authority. It has failed, and the Church has become a No-Go Area for the People of England and the Will of Parliament. It needs Suspension, while a Judicial Review investigates it’s Public Service, Employment Practices and Charitable Status. The Malcontents need to be shown the door (and hand the keys back where necessary) – as they have… Read more »
I thought it was God’s Church?
Or are you having a bit f a tease?
All that legal stuff would sit well with the Pharisees but seems a long way from Christ’s teaching.
I’m not sure how much further theological advice will change anything. The problem is not a lack of theological advice, analysis, investigation, discussion, workgroups, prayer.
The problem is that there is no unity on the theology, on this or many other theological issues. To think theological unity might be gained is a fantasy.
Certainly expressions and actions of love, and a halt to pettiness, would help. On all sides.
Will disagreements ameliorate? Or is drastic change required?
Are positions maintained because of fear? How does Jesus create freedom from fear?
“If I permit two people of the same sex to marry in my church, *I* may go to Hell” certainly sounds like fear.
I have sent an email providing links to Mark Oakley’s sermon and David Montieth’s article to my bishops in Southwell and Nottingham. I added that I felt deeply ashamed about the bishops’ response to LLF. I wonder if they will reply?
Don’t hold your breath. I have done the same in St Albans (where we are in vacancy) and have received immediate responses.
As a Southwell resident, I would think that is highly unlikely.
Bishops not rtelying to heartfelt letters is not only pastorally outrageous but also simply rude. Those who receive no reply should tell them so, it is about time people stopped being so deferential to them and said it as it is.
I know there’s been a lot happening recently, but the Durham Report on Pilavachi doesn’t seem to have been referenced at all on these pages unless I’ve missed something. It’s so relevant to the LLF debate, as MP was the poster boy for charismatic evangelical celibate singleness and the undisputed model for successful orthodox outreach to young people. The silence from all sides is deafening, particularly from those who championed him. Incidentally, I notice that New Wine is looking for a new chair of trustees, anyone know any more as to why the recently appointed present incumbent is leaving so… Read more »
Funny you should mention the Durham University report into Soul Survivor . I was thinking the same thing. Stephen Parsons has written an excellent article about it in ‘Surviving Church’ – maybe this could be linked on TA by someone clever enough to do this?
The Durham report is independent of the Church of England and listens to the harm Soul Survivor did to young people involved with Pilavachi so it would be quite a challenging read for the Control Freaks of the organisation engaged in keeping the lid on and pretending it was just a little blip
This, from Bishop Walker, the old guard Bishop of Manchester I find simply appalling – grossly insensitive and so out of touch with his own diocese. Why bother to even say it, it does more harm than being silent would.
https://www.manchester.anglican.org/llf/
“Sorry, gays, but we’re too scared of conservatives to actually stand up for you so we’re just going to sacrifice you on the altar of ‘unity’. Again.”
How long, O Lord?