”St Paul also wrote in modern English”. Surely this is a joke? Most of the New Testament is written in fairly simple Greek, but some of the key words would surely have meant little to an uninstructucted Greek speaking pagan. One can imagine that pagan thinking ” What do they mean by ”Christ”? What do they mean by the ”kingdom of heaven”? What do they mean by ”apostle”? The problem would be not so much the words themselves, but rather the wholly new and alien concepts signified by these words. The work of the Christian preacher and teacher – then… Read more »
They’d surely have had no trouble at all with these terms. I’m quite sure now that Pauline, and subsequent Christianity derived far more of its ideas from Hellenistic paganism than from whatever religion is described in the pages of the Old Testament.
Do you believe every academic discipline should exclude technical language? e.g. Astrophysicists shouldn’t use words like parsec, redshift and singularity. I don’t think Galileo used these words in his writings.
I’m all for calling out deliberate obfuscation, and agree that there’s a lot of it in theology where (it seems to me) unclear writing sometimes reflects unclear thinking, but surely most disciplines evolve their own vocabulary? If you’re discussing Pauline pneumatology it’s useful not to have to write ‘St. Paul’s beliefs about the Holy Spirit’ every time!
My main point is that the whole point about the article is theology and parish life, so you can hardly use technical language if you want to encourage the pews. Yes, I think you should say ‘St Paul’s beliefs about the Holy Spirit/salvation’ when trying to reach a wider audience (the pews or the parish). I could wax lyrical about the tendency of groups to invent and use language which excludes those outside the group, but it should be obvious to everybody? Since when was theology restricted to academics? That is the whole point. Some of you seem to be… Read more »
C.S. Lewis was well known for his insistence on using language that ordinary people could understand (although, being an academic, he was well able to use that language as well). Somewhere in his writings he suggests that every ordination exam should include a requirement to take a passage from a standard book of theology and translate it into non-technical language that ordinary readers could understand. Failure to be able to do this, he says, should mean failing the exam.
Bernard Lonergan once quipped: “Specialists may speak to their wives about many things; but not about their specialty”. Be that as it may, I have always found the approach of my mentor and friend Greg Macleod more useful. Fr. Greg studied at Oxford and had a Ph.D. in phil from Louvain. At lecture and panel discussions his colleagues would ask him long winded jargon laced questions. Greg ( as he liked to be called by all including students) would start his response with: ” Yeah, so what you are saying is…” Translating the question into a vernacular everyone could understand.… Read more »
I have a recollection (lacking detail as you’ll soon see) from the late 60s or early 70s: it may have been Dick Cavett interviewing a famous astrophysicist, who said something very much in the jargon of his field and then Cavett said, “Could you put that in layman’s terms?” The scientist paused, misted over a bit as he went into his head, and then said, “There are no layman’s terms.” I don’t think that is true of the terms cited above, but there are a few theological terms that require more than a few phrases to unpack.
I’m wondering why you don’t think ‘doctrine’ and ‘salvation’ are words that are part of the same obscure (in this case Latinate) vocabulary.
And I wonder also how accessible the phrase ‘wax lyrical’ might be to those for whom English is not their first language, or whose reading age is not especially high. We can all attend to our words – and we can all miss the obvious.
Soteriology will be taken seriously when theologians in the academy are found in the posture of the saved, and pneumatology seen as having relevance when the Spirit disrupts the armchair theologian’s comfort.
It seems to me that the point being made is that the professional theologian’s vocabulary is only relevant when it is clearly rooted in the christian experience of salvation and inspiration. He is not using technical jargon, he is talking sensibly about it.
The hint is is the title – ‘theologians in real life’, commenting on a piece ‘bringing theology back to the parishes’.
I’m afraid from some responses the problem is worse than I thought (hides under a bush).
Let me go and read an article about different interpretations of ergodicity.
The funniest and most illuminating response was from Tim Chesterton, who said the words are from the vernacular, Greek. so why not use words from the vernacular, English? Maybe communication will improve?
What is the audience? Has the audience left the building?
This is not a proclamation made in a parish but a discussion about what should be proclaimed in parishes and therefore among people who already have an interest in things which require a more specialised vocabulary
i do not see how scattering vernacular Greek words amongst English sentences helps many, when perfectly acceptable English vernacular words could be used instead1 Discuss!
I’m surprised no one has revived that old joke from the late 1970s (with variant readings!) on the issue of language:
Jesus said to some Anglicans, “Who do you say that I am?”
They replied, “You are the eschatological manifestation of the ground of our being, the kerygma of which we find the ultimate meaning in our interpersonal relationships.”
In fact, technical terms are fine – as long as they are explained to a lay audience. James Burke was exceptionally good at that in the history of science and ideas.
Because they are convenient in discussion among those familiar with the topic, they often have a more precise sense than their supposed counterparts and they are often rather beautiful
So after saying “Too often Theology does not sound as though it knows, cares about or understands the worlds that real flesh and blood humans inhabit”, the writer then quotes P.T. Forsyth in a paragraph which instead of promoting the argument should be instead a perfect example of what the argument is all about. And does not see the irony!
Exactly! in one simple paragraph you succinctly and clearly stated the problem which I have been languorously trying to explain.
There are, of course, in certain fields, technical terms which cannot be avoided. But there are many other terms for which there are perfectly acceptable and clear vernacular terms.
Francis James
20 days ago
All professions do indulge in jargon, that is true. However, it is well known that jargon & fashionable catchphrases can be used to mask lack of real content, and the less they are used the more thought has gone into the work.
Martin Hughes
20 days ago
Mind you, the problem is uninterest, not disinterest, a very different thing
Martin Hughes
20 days ago
I was mentioning on another thread my experience, which has stayed with me for many years, of a fellow student who exploded out of Anglicanism into atheism on discovering the discrepancies between the two accounts of the Incarnation. I wonder if enquiring minds should be a little prepared for the difficulties that they will encounter as they take some steps towards scholarship. Many years later I asked a friendly clergyman who had just preached on John 21 whether the doubts over the status of that chapter should be mentioned and he replied that people get upset if you say things… Read more »
Many years ago, when at my theological college, I used the word “perhaps” in my “sermon class”. The student detailed to critique my effort thundered, “How can he convince his congregation when he’s not even sure himself?”. Later, the Pastoral Studies tutor gave me his feedback, but made no mention of my word and the comment. When I raised this with him, he said of the student, “He’ll learn!”. I think there is a place for sometimes introducing genuine doubt into sermons – not only is it honest, but it shows hearers that the preacher has uncertainties about the Faith,… Read more »
Graham Leonard in his 1973 Truro enthronement sermon referred to ‘the modern error of supposing that we can only preach about what we have fully understood’. That is recorded on page 111 of the Peart-Binns biography of Leonard.
In some circumstances ‘beyond our ken’ is a proper attitude and, I would think, in many ways already part of the thoughts of normal churchgoers. But it isn’t very adequate as a response to problems of the origins of the scriptures and the apparent conflicts between them. If scholarship, a practice mentioned, here is to come into contact with preaching and discussion over coffee after the service that is the sort of problem that needs to be addressed
Ah, “Beyond our Ken”! That takes me back at bit, to the late 1950’s, only surpassed by it’s follow-up of “Around the Horne”. Kenneth Horne was a true gentleman, a rarity among comedians.
Thank you, Martin.
Even earlier, 1940s and extending into the ’50s, “Much binding in the Marsh” with Richard Murdoch, Sam Costa and others prominent alongside Kenneth Horne (there’s an explanation of the show’s name on Wikipedia). As always in radio comedy shows of that era, one or more catchphrases would be expected and regularly appeared: Sam Costa’s “Good morning, sir, was there something?” would make the studio audience erupt into laughter. The show ended each week with the song “There’s much binding in the marsh”, alternate lines sung by Kenneth Horne and ‘Dicky’ Murdoch, always interposing some topical news of the day or… Read more »
Martin Hughes
20 days ago
Thank you for drawing attention to Evagrius Ponticus. I’ve looked him up. He doesn’t exactly say that ‘if you pray, you’re a theologian’ though that might indeed be true. He says ‘if you pray truly’ and that means if you pray in the manner he teaches you will be a theologian. This is prayer with a certain detachment of mind and I suppose that to appreciate this teaching you need some existing appreciation, at least at the pop philosophy level, of Plato and the Stoics
Jane Charman
19 days ago
Professor Mike Higton (he who oversees the Common Awards in Theology, Mission and Ministry programme that trains Church of England clergy) was once challenged to write a sermon on the Trinity in words of one syllable and did so. You can find it online if anyone’s interested.
Marcus Walker and colleagues started a pressure group a while back, and he now reports that their concerns are clearly being listened to by the national Church leadership. So that’s good news.
Last edited 19 days ago by Simon W
Simon Dawson
19 days ago
Regarding Jarel Robinson-Brown’s article, I was struck by this sentence. “So many of our lay faithful are disabled from living a theological life because they exist in a world which demands their constant attention and labour, and we have at almost every turn allowed them to be consumed with an atheistic anxiety over the future of bricks and mortar”. In my admittedly anecdotal experience, based around Sarum College in Salisbury, it is the ordained faithful who are disabled from taking the time to do theology because they are distracted by anxiety over the many demanding management and finance and safeguarding… Read more »
Thanks Tim. I thought that your Canadian colleague was right on the money as well. Working as a nurse and not a minister I had to devote valuable time translating Greek and Latin terms into English for the benefit of student nurses and patients. Why we still use Greek terms in medicine is a very good question. When a patient is called in for a “Cystoscopy” he has no idea what to expect, But it helps when I explain the Greek words for “bladder” and “viewing”. If the letter from the hospital simply said “CCTV bladder examination” it would save… Read more »
Last edited 18 days ago by Simon Dawson
Surrealist
19 days ago
A left-field interjection, to stir the pot, perhaps? Should parish clergy, to narrow it down, be primarily invested in doing theology? It seems to me that their key tasks are to be didaskoi (teachers) of the didache/didaskalia (teaching) of the faith, and to engage in the kerygma (proclamation) of the euaggelion (gospel). Theological work, of course, for these tasks are ‘god-talk’. But – NOT – the kind of speculative/revisionist thinking that academic theology sometimes turns into? And – PROVOCATION HERE – aren’t most of the members of the church meant to be recipients of the didache and kerygma, as delivered… Read more »
Thank you for using both Greek vernacular and English vernacular! You have satisfied all parties. I understood what you are saying, and agree with it.
I don’t even know what ‘doing theology’ is meant to mean. Praying? Studying the bible? critical analysis of the bible? Evaluating how the message needs to be understood in our modern era?
Whenever a contemporary issue arises, and there is a call for ‘more theology’, I have absolutely no idea what ‘more theology’ is meant to mean.
“I don’t even know what ‘doing theology’ is meant to mean.” It may mean the theory and praxis model of theological engagement. A picture is worth a thousand words. Picture liberation theology as a prime example (link). It contrasts with the middle class pablum one often encounters in preaching these days.
While you have your dictionary at hand look up ‘theologize’. It’s a verb. If you want to go big on the issue of ‘doing’ you might try tackling Bernard Lonergan’s watershed , Method in Theology. Any decent theological library will have a copy. From the Introduction: ” Method is not a set of rules to be followed meticulously by a dolt. It is a framework for collaborative creativity. It would outline the various clusters of operations to be performed by theologians when they go about their various tasks.” (underlining mine). If you are familiar with liberation theology then you will… Read more »
Do is a transitive verb. It either takes a verb infinitive as its object or a noun. ‘Theology’ is a noun, as you say, and therefore quite entitled to stand as the object of ‘do’. There are other academic subjects you can ‘do’. One of my daughters ‘did’ physics at university, another ‘did’ music and another did, indeed, ‘do’ theology.
But the analogy is not helpful. sure, you can study theology, but I think when people talk about ‘doing’ theology they mean something else? ‘Do’ is such a meaningless vague verb. After studying music, did she perform music, write music, teach music, or all of the above? I’m not questioning the grammar, I’m question whether ‘do theology’ is communicating anything useful. Wittgenstein, I understand, was quite keen on the idea of applying philosophy to real life. In what ways I always struggled to understand, but I think he was a medical orderly during the first world war – I am… Read more »
One would encounter a wide spectrum there. For example, there would be the mother I encountered who was defiantly angry with God for the loss of her child, and who believed God was big enough to deal with her appropriate anger. (Jeremiah 31:15). On the other hand there would be the pious layman who invited me to his bible study group, a health care specialist as it happened, who said in the group: “Michelangelo only made one mistake. He depicted Adam as having a an umbilicus. ” Lol!
I think that ‘believe it because I tell you’ has drawbacks. Very characteristic of some other religious organisations which I rather dislike, but that’s a personal value judgement
I would suggest that all laity do theology for themselves. That is they think about the nature of God, reflect on the Bible passages that they hear or read, work out what they believe and hopefully attempt to relate it to their daily lives. Preachers may see their lay congregation as recipients; in reality the congregation is deciding whether or not to take on board what the preacher is saying. Scholarship may be a useful tool or it can be quite a narrow lens with which to view God who is undoubtedly present in the lives of many of the… Read more »
“in reality the congregation is deciding whether or not to take on board what the preacher is saying” Quite so. If they’re paying any attention at all. Which they might be more inclined to do if they had an opportunity to challenge and raise queries. It’s all a bit “de haut on basse”, isn’t it?
Tony Bellows
17 days ago
On the Big Issue / Russell T Davies article: “I’ve added straight people to the list – straight people are discriminated against by the Church of England’s conviction that sexual activity is only allowed within marriage – a conviction ignored by the majority of the heterosexual population.” The writer doesn’t give examples. I’ve never seen any sign in our church that this is so, either in the notice board or on sermons showing discrimination. True, when I was married, the Rector did tell us off for having sex before marriage – “I’m very disappointed in you” – but then later… Read more »
These punishments issued by the archdeacons’ (‘bawdy’) courts or consistory courts continued until the last quarter of the 18th century: Woodforde’s incident at Weston Longville would have been very late, and suggests that the authorities in Norwich were something of a hold out. As far as I can make out punishment by means of an act of public penance was not formally abolished (others may wish to correct me), but the archdeacons’ courts petered out during the 18th century, essentially because after the Toleration Act 1689 church attendance essentially ceased to be compulsory (in fact, if not in letter) and… Read more »
I think that what killed off the ecclesiastical courts’ jurisdiction over morals was the end of the civil disabilities attendant on excommunication, in 1816?
Does the writer mean that the CofE should positively endorse sex outside marriage rather than simply for the most part ignoring it?
I mean the Church should positively endorse people having sex, whether they are married or not, sex that is responsible, loving, mutual, etc.
“Sex outside marriage” is the traditional fear of Church and society – who is the father? I simply note that this is the interpretation you put on what I have written.
Watched an interesting documentary on Delius last night. Seems like he was determined to have sex at every opportunity. Not sure about the ‘responsible’ part, but ‘loving, mutual’ may have often been there.
I had no idea that he was so influenced by Black American music.
As a parish priest I was relieved to find someone with a real gift for marriage prep. On asking what drew her to this ministry she told of her own experience. Vicar to Mary: “I now want to talk about intimate matters. You won’t be interested, dear. So why not make a cup of tea while John and I have a chat.” We moved on from then. But is either not talking about it at all, or saying the “the Church teaches that…”, in reality much better? Most of us, bishops included, conspire in the silence; while Evangelicals to their… Read more »
Ah. This reminds me of happy hours spent with the Kirk Session minutes of parishes in my local council district. ‘Trilapse in fornication’ was a phrase that popped up frequently and the cutty stool was occupied most Sundays — which proved perhaps how ineffectual it was as a deterrent.
Pam Wilkinson
16 days ago
As a lapsed Anglican interested in “theology” (if that means “thinking about the meaning of life and of the Divine and the nature of the universe) I do wish that discussion of theology could be more readily accepted as part of the everyday life of a church. And I admire and have participated in local attempts to explore “liberal theology” which have elicited interested and grateful responses from parishioners. But with some justified anxiety about what “the Bishop”, who comes from a very different tradition, might think of it. As for “soteriology” (yes, I do know what it means) it… Read more »
Thank you, Pam, for posting your thoughtful comment that reflects the tone and theological wisdom of what was a common mindset among “Thinking Anglicans” in earlier decades. If only “the vexed question of the literal truth of the Scriptures lying at the heart of this debate” hadn’t become such a difficult question to raise in the contemporary church. I went to church twice yesterday, in the morning to a central London inclusive strongly LGBTQIA+ affirming church and in the evening to an HTB plant (for first-hand experience of what is being rolled our across the CofE). Neither place felt as… Read more »
I suspect that’s increasingly true. The fundamentalist direction in which so much is going (not just the church) is inimical to the exploration of truth.
Much to commend in Jarel Robinson-Brown’s article.
But he still falls into the trap and uses technical jargon.
Soteriology – doctrine of salvation
Pneumatology – theology of Holy Spirit
I had never come across those words before. I don’t think St Paul used those words when writing Romans.
He must surely have used soteria, neuma, and logos in his writings!
I have no idea, like most I read his writings in English! I thought St Paul also wrote in modern English?
”St Paul also wrote in modern English”. Surely this is a joke? Most of the New Testament is written in fairly simple Greek, but some of the key words would surely have meant little to an uninstructucted Greek speaking pagan. One can imagine that pagan thinking ” What do they mean by ”Christ”? What do they mean by the ”kingdom of heaven”? What do they mean by ”apostle”? The problem would be not so much the words themselves, but rather the wholly new and alien concepts signified by these words. The work of the Christian preacher and teacher – then… Read more »
Of course it was a joke! But see below about the vernacular.
They’d surely have had no trouble at all with these terms. I’m quite sure now that Pauline, and subsequent Christianity derived far more of its ideas from Hellenistic paganism than from whatever religion is described in the pages of the Old Testament.
Yes indeed, but he and his readers spoke Greek and those are Greek words. In other words, he used words from the vernacular.
Pneuma?
Indeed.
Do you believe every academic discipline should exclude technical language? e.g. Astrophysicists shouldn’t use words like parsec, redshift and singularity. I don’t think Galileo used these words in his writings.
That’s because Galileo didn’t know about redshifts or singularities, and his estimates of distances to stars were out by several orders of magnitude.
Famously he did know about heliocentrism. Many people would tell you they’ve never heard of that, but would know that the earth goes around the sun.
Commend- approve of
I’m all for calling out deliberate obfuscation, and agree that there’s a lot of it in theology where (it seems to me) unclear writing sometimes reflects unclear thinking, but surely most disciplines evolve their own vocabulary? If you’re discussing Pauline pneumatology it’s useful not to have to write ‘St. Paul’s beliefs about the Holy Spirit’ every time!
My main point is that the whole point about the article is theology and parish life, so you can hardly use technical language if you want to encourage the pews. Yes, I think you should say ‘St Paul’s beliefs about the Holy Spirit/salvation’ when trying to reach a wider audience (the pews or the parish). I could wax lyrical about the tendency of groups to invent and use language which excludes those outside the group, but it should be obvious to everybody? Since when was theology restricted to academics? That is the whole point. Some of you seem to be… Read more »
C.S. Lewis was well known for his insistence on using language that ordinary people could understand (although, being an academic, he was well able to use that language as well). Somewhere in his writings he suggests that every ordination exam should include a requirement to take a passage from a standard book of theology and translate it into non-technical language that ordinary readers could understand. Failure to be able to do this, he says, should mean failing the exam.
Bernard Lonergan once quipped: “Specialists may speak to their wives about many things; but not about their specialty”. Be that as it may, I have always found the approach of my mentor and friend Greg Macleod more useful. Fr. Greg studied at Oxford and had a Ph.D. in phil from Louvain. At lecture and panel discussions his colleagues would ask him long winded jargon laced questions. Greg ( as he liked to be called by all including students) would start his response with: ” Yeah, so what you are saying is…” Translating the question into a vernacular everyone could understand.… Read more »
I have a recollection (lacking detail as you’ll soon see) from the late 60s or early 70s: it may have been Dick Cavett interviewing a famous astrophysicist, who said something very much in the jargon of his field and then Cavett said, “Could you put that in layman’s terms?” The scientist paused, misted over a bit as he went into his head, and then said, “There are no layman’s terms.” I don’t think that is true of the terms cited above, but there are a few theological terms that require more than a few phrases to unpack.
This is from one of the greatest physicists. It’s insightful for how to do and teach science, but it can be applied well beyond that.
https://meaning.guide/2019/01/28/richard-feynman-and-the-problem-ofsaying-what-one-word-means-in-terms-of-other-words/
I’m wondering why you don’t think ‘doctrine’ and ‘salvation’ are words that are part of the same obscure (in this case Latinate) vocabulary.
And I wonder also how accessible the phrase ‘wax lyrical’ might be to those for whom English is not their first language, or whose reading age is not especially high. We can all attend to our words – and we can all miss the obvious.
What J R-B wrote was
Soteriology will be taken seriously when theologians in the academy are found in the posture of the saved, and pneumatology seen as having relevance when the Spirit disrupts the armchair theologian’s comfort.
It seems to me that the point being made is that the professional theologian’s vocabulary is only relevant when it is clearly rooted in the christian experience of salvation and inspiration. He is not using technical jargon, he is talking sensibly about it.
They are completely appropriate words when addressing a blog for people who are ready to take time over such things. Rather beatiful words too
The hint is is the title – ‘theologians in real life’, commenting on a piece ‘bringing theology back to the parishes’.
I’m afraid from some responses the problem is worse than I thought (hides under a bush).
Let me go and read an article about different interpretations of ergodicity.
The funniest and most illuminating response was from Tim Chesterton, who said the words are from the vernacular, Greek. so why not use words from the vernacular, English? Maybe communication will improve?
What is the audience? Has the audience left the building?
This is not a proclamation made in a parish but a discussion about what should be proclaimed in parishes and therefore among people who already have an interest in things which require a more specialised vocabulary
i do not see how scattering vernacular Greek words amongst English sentences helps many, when perfectly acceptable English vernacular words could be used instead1 Discuss!
I’m surprised no one has revived that old joke from the late 1970s (with variant readings!) on the issue of language:
Jesus said to some Anglicans, “Who do you say that I am?”
They replied, “You are the eschatological manifestation of the ground of our being, the kerygma of which we find the ultimate meaning in our interpersonal relationships.”
In fact, technical terms are fine – as long as they are explained to a lay audience. James Burke was exceptionally good at that in the history of science and ideas.
Because they are convenient in discussion among those familiar with the topic, they often have a more precise sense than their supposed counterparts and they are often rather beautiful
So after saying “Too often Theology does not sound as though it knows, cares about or understands the worlds that real flesh and blood humans inhabit”, the writer then quotes P.T. Forsyth in a paragraph which instead of promoting the argument should be instead a perfect example of what the argument is all about. And does not see the irony!
Exactly! in one simple paragraph you succinctly and clearly stated the problem which I have been languorously trying to explain.
There are, of course, in certain fields, technical terms which cannot be avoided. But there are many other terms for which there are perfectly acceptable and clear vernacular terms.
All professions do indulge in jargon, that is true. However, it is well known that jargon & fashionable catchphrases can be used to mask lack of real content, and the less they are used the more thought has gone into the work.
Mind you, the problem is uninterest, not disinterest, a very different thing
I was mentioning on another thread my experience, which has stayed with me for many years, of a fellow student who exploded out of Anglicanism into atheism on discovering the discrepancies between the two accounts of the Incarnation. I wonder if enquiring minds should be a little prepared for the difficulties that they will encounter as they take some steps towards scholarship. Many years later I asked a friendly clergyman who had just preached on John 21 whether the doubts over the status of that chapter should be mentioned and he replied that people get upset if you say things… Read more »
Many years ago, when at my theological college, I used the word “perhaps” in my “sermon class”. The student detailed to critique my effort thundered, “How can he convince his congregation when he’s not even sure himself?”. Later, the Pastoral Studies tutor gave me his feedback, but made no mention of my word and the comment. When I raised this with him, he said of the student, “He’ll learn!”. I think there is a place for sometimes introducing genuine doubt into sermons – not only is it honest, but it shows hearers that the preacher has uncertainties about the Faith,… Read more »
Graham Leonard in his 1973 Truro enthronement sermon referred to ‘the modern error of supposing that we can only preach about what we have fully understood’. That is recorded on page 111 of the Peart-Binns biography of Leonard.
In some circumstances ‘beyond our ken’ is a proper attitude and, I would think, in many ways already part of the thoughts of normal churchgoers. But it isn’t very adequate as a response to problems of the origins of the scriptures and the apparent conflicts between them. If scholarship, a practice mentioned, here is to come into contact with preaching and discussion over coffee after the service that is the sort of problem that needs to be addressed
‘Beyond our ken’ has taken my mind back to The Sound of Music:
‘Totally unprepared are you
To face a world of men
Timid and shy and scared are you
Of things beyond your ken’
Ah, “Beyond our Ken”! That takes me back at bit, to the late 1950’s, only surpassed by it’s follow-up of “Around the Horne”. Kenneth Horne was a true gentleman, a rarity among comedians.
Thank you, Martin.
His father, Sylvester Horne, was a Congregational Minister and Liberal MP. He wrote the hymn “Sing we the King who is coming to reign”.
I note from Wikipedia that one of Sylvester Horne’s grandchildren was Ronald Gordon, Bishop of Portsmouth.
Even earlier, 1940s and extending into the ’50s, “Much binding in the Marsh” with Richard Murdoch, Sam Costa and others prominent alongside Kenneth Horne (there’s an explanation of the show’s name on Wikipedia). As always in radio comedy shows of that era, one or more catchphrases would be expected and regularly appeared: Sam Costa’s “Good morning, sir, was there something?” would make the studio audience erupt into laughter. The show ended each week with the song “There’s much binding in the marsh”, alternate lines sung by Kenneth Horne and ‘Dicky’ Murdoch, always interposing some topical news of the day or… Read more »
Thank you for drawing attention to Evagrius Ponticus. I’ve looked him up. He doesn’t exactly say that ‘if you pray, you’re a theologian’ though that might indeed be true. He says ‘if you pray truly’ and that means if you pray in the manner he teaches you will be a theologian. This is prayer with a certain detachment of mind and I suppose that to appreciate this teaching you need some existing appreciation, at least at the pop philosophy level, of Plato and the Stoics
Professor Mike Higton (he who oversees the Common Awards in Theology, Mission and Ministry programme that trains Church of England clergy) was once challenged to write a sermon on the Trinity in words of one syllable and did so. You can find it online if anyone’s interested.
It is here and it is brilliant.
Trinity Sunday – ‘One-Bit Word Game’ – Mike Higton – St Brandon’s
But you will notice it hinges on one syllable being inadequate in the end.
Nevertheless, a really good example of a theology professor preaching intelligently and intelligibly.
Thanks!
Marcus Walker and colleagues started a pressure group a while back, and he now reports that their concerns are clearly being listened to by the national Church leadership. So that’s good news.
Regarding Jarel Robinson-Brown’s article, I was struck by this sentence. “So many of our lay faithful are disabled from living a theological life because they exist in a world which demands their constant attention and labour, and we have at almost every turn allowed them to be consumed with an atheistic anxiety over the future of bricks and mortar”. In my admittedly anecdotal experience, based around Sarum College in Salisbury, it is the ordained faithful who are disabled from taking the time to do theology because they are distracted by anxiety over the many demanding management and finance and safeguarding… Read more »
Spot on.
I couldn’t have said it any better, Simon.
Thanks Tim. I thought that your Canadian colleague was right on the money as well. Working as a nurse and not a minister I had to devote valuable time translating Greek and Latin terms into English for the benefit of student nurses and patients. Why we still use Greek terms in medicine is a very good question. When a patient is called in for a “Cystoscopy” he has no idea what to expect, But it helps when I explain the Greek words for “bladder” and “viewing”. If the letter from the hospital simply said “CCTV bladder examination” it would save… Read more »
A left-field interjection, to stir the pot, perhaps? Should parish clergy, to narrow it down, be primarily invested in doing theology? It seems to me that their key tasks are to be didaskoi (teachers) of the didache/didaskalia (teaching) of the faith, and to engage in the kerygma (proclamation) of the euaggelion (gospel). Theological work, of course, for these tasks are ‘god-talk’. But – NOT – the kind of speculative/revisionist thinking that academic theology sometimes turns into? And – PROVOCATION HERE – aren’t most of the members of the church meant to be recipients of the didache and kerygma, as delivered… Read more »
And a similar train of thought by the church brought poor William Tyndall to a jolly unpleasant end didn’t it? But it’s all Greek to me…
Thank you for using both Greek vernacular and English vernacular! You have satisfied all parties. I understood what you are saying, and agree with it.
I don’t even know what ‘doing theology’ is meant to mean. Praying? Studying the bible? critical analysis of the bible? Evaluating how the message needs to be understood in our modern era?
Whenever a contemporary issue arises, and there is a call for ‘more theology’, I have absolutely no idea what ‘more theology’ is meant to mean.
Self-confessed ignorance seems to suggest that a greater degree of theological exposition is indeed needed in our churches, one might have thought.
Are you suggesting more elementary courses in Greek? Or an education for clergy into how to communicate better? For different audiences?
“I don’t even know what ‘doing theology’ is meant to mean.” It may mean the theory and praxis model of theological engagement. A picture is worth a thousand words. Picture liberation theology as a prime example (link). It contrasts with the middle class pablum one often encounters in preaching these days.
The Decolonial Turn in Liberation Theology: Between Theory and Praxis | Contending Modernities
I have been familiar with liberation theology since the 1970’s. I know what it is. But I don’t know how you do it.
Do is a verb. Liberation theology is a noun.
[looks up pablum quickly – aha, malarkey!]
While you have your dictionary at hand look up ‘theologize’. It’s a verb. If you want to go big on the issue of ‘doing’ you might try tackling Bernard Lonergan’s watershed , Method in Theology. Any decent theological library will have a copy. From the Introduction: ” Method is not a set of rules to be followed meticulously by a dolt. It is a framework for collaborative creativity. It would outline the various clusters of operations to be performed by theologians when they go about their various tasks.” (underlining mine). If you are familiar with liberation theology then you will… Read more »
Do is a transitive verb. It either takes a verb infinitive as its object or a noun. ‘Theology’ is a noun, as you say, and therefore quite entitled to stand as the object of ‘do’. There are other academic subjects you can ‘do’. One of my daughters ‘did’ physics at university, another ‘did’ music and another did, indeed, ‘do’ theology.
But the analogy is not helpful. sure, you can study theology, but I think when people talk about ‘doing’ theology they mean something else? ‘Do’ is such a meaningless vague verb. After studying music, did she perform music, write music, teach music, or all of the above? I’m not questioning the grammar, I’m question whether ‘do theology’ is communicating anything useful. Wittgenstein, I understand, was quite keen on the idea of applying philosophy to real life. In what ways I always struggled to understand, but I think he was a medical orderly during the first world war – I am… Read more »
I think we both agree that it is a bit silly.
You are being as pretentious as the writer of the article under discussion!
Ref your “provocation” – I have always been attracted by Barbara Brown Taylor’s comment:
“What if people were invited to church to come tell what they already know of God, instead of to learn what they are supposed to believe.”
One would encounter a wide spectrum there. For example, there would be the mother I encountered who was defiantly angry with God for the loss of her child, and who believed God was big enough to deal with her appropriate anger. (Jeremiah 31:15). On the other hand there would be the pious layman who invited me to his bible study group, a health care specialist as it happened, who said in the group: “Michelangelo only made one mistake. He depicted Adam as having a an umbilicus. ” Lol!
I think that ‘believe it because I tell you’ has drawbacks. Very characteristic of some other religious organisations which I rather dislike, but that’s a personal value judgement
I would suggest that all laity do theology for themselves. That is they think about the nature of God, reflect on the Bible passages that they hear or read, work out what they believe and hopefully attempt to relate it to their daily lives. Preachers may see their lay congregation as recipients; in reality the congregation is deciding whether or not to take on board what the preacher is saying. Scholarship may be a useful tool or it can be quite a narrow lens with which to view God who is undoubtedly present in the lives of many of the… Read more »
“in reality the congregation is deciding whether or not to take on board what the preacher is saying” Quite so. If they’re paying any attention at all. Which they might be more inclined to do if they had an opportunity to challenge and raise queries. It’s all a bit “de haut on basse”, isn’t it?
On the Big Issue / Russell T Davies article: “I’ve added straight people to the list – straight people are discriminated against by the Church of England’s conviction that sexual activity is only allowed within marriage – a conviction ignored by the majority of the heterosexual population.” The writer doesn’t give examples. I’ve never seen any sign in our church that this is so, either in the notice board or on sermons showing discrimination. True, when I was married, the Rector did tell us off for having sex before marriage – “I’m very disappointed in you” – but then later… Read more »
These punishments issued by the archdeacons’ (‘bawdy’) courts or consistory courts continued until the last quarter of the 18th century: Woodforde’s incident at Weston Longville would have been very late, and suggests that the authorities in Norwich were something of a hold out. As far as I can make out punishment by means of an act of public penance was not formally abolished (others may wish to correct me), but the archdeacons’ courts petered out during the 18th century, essentially because after the Toleration Act 1689 church attendance essentially ceased to be compulsory (in fact, if not in letter) and… Read more »
I think that what killed off the ecclesiastical courts’ jurisdiction over morals was the end of the civil disabilities attendant on excommunication, in 1816?
Tony Bellows – you ask:
Does the writer mean that the CofE should positively endorse sex outside marriage rather than simply for the most part ignoring it?
I mean the Church should positively endorse people having sex, whether they are married or not, sex that is responsible, loving, mutual, etc.
“Sex outside marriage” is the traditional fear of Church and society – who is the father? I simply note that this is the interpretation you put on what I have written.
Watched an interesting documentary on Delius last night. Seems like he was determined to have sex at every opportunity. Not sure about the ‘responsible’ part, but ‘loving, mutual’ may have often been there.
I had no idea that he was so influenced by Black American music.
As a parish priest I was relieved to find someone with a real gift for marriage prep. On asking what drew her to this ministry she told of her own experience. Vicar to Mary: “I now want to talk about intimate matters. You won’t be interested, dear. So why not make a cup of tea while John and I have a chat.” We moved on from then. But is either not talking about it at all, or saying the “the Church teaches that…”, in reality much better? Most of us, bishops included, conspire in the silence; while Evangelicals to their… Read more »
Ah. This reminds me of happy hours spent with the Kirk Session minutes of parishes in my local council district. ‘Trilapse in fornication’ was a phrase that popped up frequently and the cutty stool was occupied most Sundays — which proved perhaps how ineffectual it was as a deterrent.
As a lapsed Anglican interested in “theology” (if that means “thinking about the meaning of life and of the Divine and the nature of the universe) I do wish that discussion of theology could be more readily accepted as part of the everyday life of a church. And I admire and have participated in local attempts to explore “liberal theology” which have elicited interested and grateful responses from parishioners. But with some justified anxiety about what “the Bishop”, who comes from a very different tradition, might think of it. As for “soteriology” (yes, I do know what it means) it… Read more »
Thank you, Pam, for posting your thoughtful comment that reflects the tone and theological wisdom of what was a common mindset among “Thinking Anglicans” in earlier decades. If only “the vexed question of the literal truth of the Scriptures lying at the heart of this debate” hadn’t become such a difficult question to raise in the contemporary church. I went to church twice yesterday, in the morning to a central London inclusive strongly LGBTQIA+ affirming church and in the evening to an HTB plant (for first-hand experience of what is being rolled our across the CofE). Neither place felt as… Read more »
I suspect that’s increasingly true. The fundamentalist direction in which so much is going (not just the church) is inimical to the exploration of truth.
Agreed!