Colin Coward Unadulterated Love
Mike Higton ViaMedia.News Cries of Suffering: A Response to ‘The Nature of Doctrine and the Living God’
Kat Campion-Spall ViaMedia.News Learning and Listening: Being Inclusive
Andrew Goddard Psephizo Can the PLF process be rescued?
Anon Surviving Church ‘Church of England Must Rapidly Accelerate Safeguarding Reforms’
Applauding Colin Coward’s bravery, a note of caution.
Might the use of PLF under Canon B5, if enacted in what some may see as visible open rebellion against episcopal intentions, have the perverse effect of empowering a campaign for the withdrawal of the PLF’s commendation for use in any context?
The cabinet style of the House of Bishops warrants a challenge.
In earlier years bishops said what they thought was right and/or just and did not feel bound to speak as one.
How many of today’s bishops have their consciences stifled by this cabinet mentality.
Challenge away!
Over 6,000 have signed Inclusive Church’s open letter, pledging their support for bespoke services. So why didn’t I sign? Bespoke is defined as ‘specially made for a particular person or purpose’, inviting the question as to what that purpose is. The common good? Selfishness for two? Regrettably, PLF has been constrained by the ruling that it must in no way resemble a marriage, resulting in a tabula rasa captive to the priority of lived experience. The Church would be better served by a fully worked-out public liturgy that recognises the covenantal personality of committed same-sex relationships and blesses not… Read more »
Apologies Too old to genuflect – my post was in reply to Tentative.
I have fast-read much of he above, and the FAOC papers. I have a concern, which I find difficult to express. I am neither a theologian, nor a philosopher. If anything I am a physicist. I do not dispute the importance and centrality of scripture, but find reason and experience come a close second. Now, to take an example, the world of physics changed about 100 or more years ago. We had the concept of fields (Maxwell). We had the concept of operators and observations. The conceptual world of physics changed. The word ‘exists’ is meaningless in physics – we… Read more »
That is all very well. There are many countries in the world which have legislated for same-sex marriage without reference to the definition of a table. They seem to value the equality of their citizens more than a piece of furniture.
I don’t think I mentioned same-sex marriage.
One of my thoughts is whether those who like a definition of a table also tend to take a literal understanding of God and scripture, and less focus on fruits. If they embraced some of these philosophical mindsets, they may change their views on doctrine.
It’s similar to conflicts I get involved in on LinkedIn concerning climate change, when some say ‘it is unproven’ or ‘the model gets it wrong’. This simply shows a misunderstanding of science, and creates a barrier.
Then what are the “theological topics of LLF” about?
Clashing of cymbols.
The question ‘does God exist’ is meaningless.
Interestingly, George MacDonald used to say much the same thing back in the nineteenth century, in several of his novels and other writings. His view was that the question ‘Does God exist?’ is far less important than the question ‘What sort of God would be worth believing in?’
Interesting. I would rephrase the second question – rather than asking what sort of God would be worth believing in, I would say ‘what is the nature of God and our relationship to God’. The former seems a little arrogant, not a question Job asked.
“not a question Job asked.” What? If interested, see my “The Heights of the Hills are His Also” (2024) treatment of Job.
Sorry, I was too succinct. I was referring to maybe God’s answer, not Job’s questions. From chapter 38.
I often wonder what the equivalent of chapter 38 would be nowadays, as we spend so many words discussing the nature of God. The God of Job would, I think, be furious.
Am I on the right track in my stumblings?
Yes – Job never doubted the existence of God, but he certainly doubted the goodness of God. That’s MacDonald’s issue in a nutshell – if God turns out to be a monster, is he worth believing in (i.e. trusting)?
Maybe that is another tack – if God condemns people in a loving committed same-sex relationship, is he worth believing in?
I don’t want to intrude to much on the conversation you are having but there’s a slight re-working of your question:
What do I want where I spend eternity? Many of us agonise over reviews for hotels or holidays – or even the area where we buy a house- so doesn’t it make sense to care about eternity?
He did, and then he was granted his desire to see God, after which he said he had been lifted onto an altogether different plane of ‘knowledge.’ The book I wrote asks how that was accomplished such that Job would say, “I had heard of you by the hearing of the ear, but now my eye sees you.” Perhaps there is a plane where God resides where human categories of “goodness” and “monster” cannot follow. Job went there. From that vantage point, Job had spoken what was right about God, and not the friends. The final divine verdict, followed by… Read more »
Thanks, I’ll look up the book. Job is one of my favourite books of the Bible, but I approach it as a reasonably (I hope) well-informed amateur, not an OT scholar, so I’ll look forward to reading what you have to say.
Addendum: Oh gosh, Job and Psalms too, so I see! Even more interested now!
https://a.co/d/aPpF9SV
I did a couple of podcasts on this book that one can find online.
As usual, context matters, and I should have given the background. MacDonald was raised in Calvinist Scotland and heard that vision of God preached from pulpits all his early life. He later came to believe that the Calvinist God was so harsh that he wasn’t worth believing in, whether he existed or not. MacDonald was of course using the phrase ‘believing in’ in terms of trust, not just intellectual conviction.
Go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_MacDonald and scroll down to the section ‘Theology’.
Thanks. I had never heard of him.
I have looked him up and read bits of his sermons – they are long! https://www.online-literature.com/george-macdonald/unspoken-sermons/31/ I also looked at his sermon on Job, which is excellent. One section on his sermon on atonement resonates: ‘What atonement is there?’ Every atonement that God cares for; and the work of Jesus Christ on earth was the creative atonement, because it works atonement in every heart. He brings and is bringing God and man, and man and man, into perfect unity: ‘I in them and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one.’ ‘That is a dangerous doctrine!’ More… Read more »
C.S. Lewis said, “I have never concealed the fact that I regard him as my master; indeed, I fancy I have never written a book without quoting him.”
Three thoughts, Nigel. First, I reckon new expression of physics have changed how people think. If TVs had existed 150 years ago and you’d changed the channel by waving a rectangular box and pressing a button, people would have thought you were a magician. Nowadays, although most people can’t be bothered with the maths of electromagnetic fields, they know they are real. Second, the ingredients of EM fields had been known to humanity for millennia: thunderstorms and lightning, magnetic rocks, the feeling of sun on your face; we just hadn’t put them together. Is that analogous to the development of… Read more »
Absolutely! Expressed it much better than I could. To continue along that line – I don’t think the FAOC papers, albeit very interesting and scholarly, change the discussion or reduce the conflicts one jot. The conflicts are merely exposing very deep seated differences in approach. One the one hand, we have ‘scripture is the Word of God’, it is a Descartean approach. Although St Paul’s Romans is preached, and although ‘No condemnation now’ is sung, the attitudes are such that one is still under the law, the hierarchy or tradition dominate, and there is a call for a return to… Read more »
Thanks for your musings on this Nigel, fascinating. As an engineer it brought up for me “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance” where one is invited to have a boundary free, non-subject-object relationship with the bit of machinery one is tinkering with. I think there is some value in that. But more related to LLF there is Harry Hay’s ideas on subject-SUBJECT consciousness. I think there is an overlap here with what you have posted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subject-Subject_consciousness Harry was writing in the 1950s when the split as he saw it was between heterosexual and homosexual. I prefer to see the… Read more »
I wouldn’t necessarily relate it directly to patriarchy, but I do like your phrase ‘making porous the boundaries of the self’.
I also relate to the often spoken words in scripture ‘be not afraid’.
https://millyjonesblog.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/365-do-not-be-afraid-verses/
Nigel, ref your “I wouldn’t necessarily relate it directly to patriarchy,”
I am not certain myself, but suspicious that it might be relevant, so trying develop my thinking by sharing ideas on platform such as this.
Just one more comment – not ‘by looking to more fully understand and connect established doctrine, belief and practice’ but maybe ‘by more fully understanding differences in established doctrine, belief and practice, affirming those differences, and dissipating contradictions through capturing the problem of which they reflect only the shadow’.
In other words, trying to resolve differences in theology/doctrine by doing more and more theology/doctrine, in hope of a Hegelian resolution, is a futile exercise.
‘Understanding differences in established doctrine, belief and practice, affirming those differences, and dissipating contradictions through capturing the problem of which they reflect only the shadow’. Perhaps that’s a bit naive? Are there sometimes contradictions that can’t be dissipated, but rather need to be faced up to? Are there sometimes differences which just can’t be affirmed, but rather call for a krisis moment of decision one way or the other? The identification of such moments seems likely to me to be an existential, even instinctive matter, rather than one that can be governed or defined rationally by ‘doing theology’. But no… Read more »
I agree with most of what you say, and of course my views are often naive, maybe on purpose. I certainly agree that these moments are unlikely to be governed by ‘doing theology’. My main emphasis is that conflicts around LLF or same-sex etc. are surface effects, there are underlying deep differences in theology and thought and world view, as there have always been. These are what we need to capture and acknowledge. Getting congregations to talk and work together from different traditions may be a good start – it does of course already happen widely. but as we all… Read more »
Thank you Soren Kierkegaard. Exactly.
Point of order (and almost certainly splitting of hairs, and quite certainly not making any difference to the theological conclusions): surely Maxwell, and the concept of electromagnetic fields, and ultimately the development of remote controls for televisions, are essentially “old” or classical physics? Maxwell’s equations describe quantities that are continuous and are assumed to have a real physical existence, not much different in concept to, say, gravity. 19th century folk would have been amazed at the technology of a remote control but there would have been nothing intrinsically novel at the concept of cause-and-effect through a physical mechanism. Surely the… Read more »
I can’t explain it any better than Dyson’s talk. https://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/tong/em/dyson.pdf My main point is that these insights resulted in very revolutionary and radical changes in the way we view the physical world. I merely wonder whether similar changes have been, or will be, made in the theological world. To give a naive simple example, when we use the word ‘God’, what on earth do we mean? ‘God’ is but a label (sorry God, I’m not trying to be disrespectful). I very well remember as a 8 year old being taught by an AC priest that God is not an old… Read more »
Whilst I understand Colin Coward’s clarion call re the “blessing” of same sex marriages, I feel it would only serve to provide a mask of inclusivity that the Church of England does not deserve. It would be better to publicly proclaim that no such blessings are possible/allowed, thereby exposing the problem. To do otherwise is to further collude in duplicitous claims that the Church welcomes and includes. It does not. At best, it tolerates; at worst, it shames and others.
When PLF were originally voted in by Synod for use in services its expressed intention was that they should be used on experimental basis. If it appears they are being used in way not intended by Synod, then there would clearly be case for withdrawing them.
They were commended for use by the bishops. It was not an experiment.
Yes but not by Synod. That’s my point.
You claim ‘the expressed intention’ was that it was an experiment . Where was this ever expressed and by whom?
My uneducated ramblings on Husserl led me to this podcast, which helped me.
https://thinkingchristianly.org/21-a-case-study-in-thinking-christianly-and-making-a-difference-edmund-husserl/
Maybe what is interesting is that these are evangelical Christians.
Thank you for linking to Mike Higton’s piece in which he suggests his views have not been properly represented. It crystallises the reservations about the FAOC document that I expressed in my comment in an earlier thread. Could the authors, whoever they are, not have run their draft by him? Equally, I am bound to wonder if the FAOC document properly and fairly represents the views of the other theologians they refer to. This is not a trivial matter given the consequences of the FAOC document. Mike Higton reinforces my concerns about the editorial process by which it reached its… Read more »
I believe this is the first time in the post Reformation history of the Church of England that we have no bishop with a higher doctorate awarded from significant theological work from an academic background. Therefore theology in its many branches has to be brought in. I’m wondering who is on FAOC and who isn’t? We aren’t awash with talent these days I can remember the Doctrine Commission that produced Christian Believing ( whatever you might think about it) and Believing in the Church, a substantial piece of work that wasn’t even deemed worthy of a debate in Synod. Think… Read more »
The membership of FAOC is listed at https://www.churchofengland.org/about/governance/general-synod/committees-and-commissions/faith-and-order-commission
It will be seen that 6 of the 7 episcopal members of FAOC are given the style “Dr” — two of them are diocesan bishops and three are suffragan or area bishops. At least one of them is a DTh (or equivalent) rather than a PhD.
FAOC also includes 7 clergy and 2 lay members, all of whom are styled either “Professor” or “Dr”, plus two “theology advisers to the House of Bishops” both of whom are styled “Dr”.
Yes, I noted that but I would want to know what the topic of the PhD was and how up-to-date and relevant the holder’s scholarship is. It is not simply a matter of disagreement with the argument or the conclusions drawn but the integrity of what is a significant document. My question remains: how was the document drafted and how was it finalised? What was the role of the theological advisors? I’m assuming that the role of a large number of the members of the FAOC was passive,
All this information is fairly readily accessible on e.g. Wikipedia and Crockford’s and I did look several of them up before posting my earlier comment. Episcopal members Dr Robert Innes, Bishop in Europe (Chair) doctorate (Doctor of Philosophy, PhD) from Durham University in 1995. His doctoral thesis was titled “Strategies for securing the unity of the self in Augustine and certain modern psychologists”. Dr Michael Ipgrave, Bishop of Lichfield In 1999 Ipgrave completed a doctorate at Durham University with a thesis entitled Trinity and inter-faith dialogue: plenitude and plurality. Dr Graham Tomlin, Centre for Cultural Witness PhD in theology at… Read more »
Thanks Simon for digging all this out.
Arguably, some of these dates, subjects and the ethoi of some awarding institutions might support the thrust of Daniel’s contention?
The plural of ethos is ethe
Oh really? What counts as proper theology then?
An old friend of mine (also a cleric with a doctorate and several other PG degrees, in case any anti-intellectual accusations should be forming in anyone’s mind…) loves to quote an American acquaintance of theirs whose specialism is Higher Education teaching and learning. My friend trots it out whenever people conflate learning and qualifications. The quote is: ‘some people have doctorates, some have an education. A precious few have both’.
Mike Higton’s piece, which I thought very good, reminded me of a similar, personal incident a few years back. I’d read his book “The Post Evangelical”, in which he included a quote from John Drane’s book ‘The New Age’. (Another evangelical bogie man) The quote presented John’s attitude as being affirmative so, wanting to see what he said, I read the book.
The quote, a single sentence, had been lifted completely out of context – John most certainly did NOT affirm the New Age and the quote gave a totally false impression. No, I was not impressed.
My apologies for any confusion – I forgot to say the book ‘The Post Evangelical’ was written by Dave Tomlinson – not, as the comment infers, Mike Higton! The point we’re both making is that by judicious selection of words, you can make black appear to be white. Much care – and honour – is needed
Perhaps in keeping with the overall theme of the articles posted at the top of this thread for November 19th, today November 20th our Cathedral here has been observing Transgender Day of Remembrance.
https://www.cathedralchurchofallsaints.com/events/transgender-day-of-remembrance–365/2025-11-20
I have been listening to Sam Howsons videos for some time now. Very inciteful.
Trying to come to terms with the toxic nature of the institutional church in all its guises.
Colin’s article is very powerful- thank you. But there is so much in this opinion piece and it’s a shame none of the oxygen seems to have reached Anon’s article in Surviving Church .
For those with headspace to consider the pace of Safeguarding Reforms there are some very pertinent comments attached to the article.
Kat Campion-Spall’s piece makes for interesting reading and is an example of the sensitive handling of what is often a contentious issue in our parishes. Sadly I can’t take it as an encouraging sign of things to come in general. In my own diocese five parishes in my archdeaconry that had been members of Inclusive Church were made to withdraw their membership when taken over by the HTB network, all with the Bishop’s blessing.
I was astonished to read this, and v glad that I am in Scotland. But I found myself asking why has this happened? To what end? Five parishes taken over by HTB, with episcopal blessing? Obliged/instructed to abandon IC? Is this common? I suppose dormant PCC’s may (fail to) play a part. Or Archdeacons with an agenda, though I’d have thought most archdeacons were more likely to be focused on keeping heads above water. I really need to know more to understand this.