If language is the primary battleground in culture wars. Together for the Church of England appears to be engaged in a full on assault on the mainstream Christian Church and any possibility of unity. But I guess we already knew that. The English language however evolved out of the everyday use of the English bible, translated using everyday language, so perhaps that’s the place to start discussions about human sexuality. It’s really not that difficult to understand.
“The English language however evolved out of the everyday use of the English bible, translated using everyday language”
Really? I always thought that the AV (which I presume is the English Bible to which AC refers) was written in somewhat self-consciously archaic language. I wouldn’t want to underplay its cultural significance, but there’s a lot of English language – some of it religious – developing before 1611. I know St Paul used the AV, but….
English discourse was and still is certainly very much influenced by the AV, though some of the famous phrases – ‘powers that be’/ ‘my cup runneth over’ – come, I understand, from the earlier work of Tyndale and Coverdale
Your characterisation of Together for the Church of England is wide of the mark. The organisation works for the unity of the church and the full inclusion of all. It does not encourage church’s to limit their parish share so that those it disagrees with cannot be financially supported. It does not promote irregular ordinations. It does not seek alternative forms of episcopal oversight. These are all policies and actions of The Alliance, which looks increasingly like a church within a church that cannot tolerate any deviation from its own particular worldview. In July 2026 Helen King, Vice-Chair of Together,… Read more »
Peter
4 days ago
My goodness we live in strange times. Open debate about public scandals are shut down on the grounds of impropriety.
Yet we are apparently happy to engage in public discussion on matters of intimacy which every previous generation would have recognised as a subject that should be the entirely private concern of couples who are married.
I find myself echoing the words of Rowland in a previous thread. Not words I ever expected to say !
Is this topic really a matter for public comment ?
Purely in interests of accuracy, I don’t recall using those words. A better summary would be Lord Asquith’s “wait and see”. You will be relieved to know that I’m not commenting about Helen King’s articles! I have read both.
My recollection is that you were perhaps a little more emphatic than you suggest, but your general point is well made.
I do not presume to know your vintage but I guess, like me, you recall the days when the social goods of decorum and discretion were understand.
Back then people made all the same mistakes, of course. However I doubt the vulgarisation of culture and discourse since those days is really progress.
Since apparently it’s OK to return to this topic, I do not believe you understood the objections being raised. They had nothing to do with innocence or guilt about the tragic death of a man; or ‘wait and see’ just what is said about that.
No, they had to do with facts already in the public domain for which there was no need for waiting about something else.
And, I too abstain from commenting on essays on the proper language to use about this or that sex act — as if this would move the needle somehow.
The facts may be in the public domain, but the elephants remain in shadows. i am hoping those elephants come into the light following various investigations (including Ghent).
I’m afraid we must ‘wait and see’. ‘Facts’ in the public domain must be factually accurate to merit respect and serious consideration. We now have to respect the editors’ decision to close this debate. I have no doubt that it will reopen in due course, although not necessarily in a religious context, nor hence on TA.
Just to be clear, you did not judge the matter “closed” as you yourself re-entered with: “Purely in interests of accuracy, I don’t recall using those words. A better summary would be Lord Asquith’s “wait and see”. You will be relieved to know that I’m not commenting about Helen King’s articles! I have read both.” And of course whether facts in the public domain are “factually accurate or not” is not for you to foreclose on, by fiat. Let us respect the generous flow of discourse without any hindrance or declarations from on high. TA has generally been good at… Read more »
I’m afraid that I don’t accept this, or the sophistry employed based on my very mild correction of what I am claimed to have said on the previous, now closed, thread. It was not I who reopened that matter. This had ceased to be primarily a subject for TA which I tookto be the reason for Simon Sarmiento’s decision.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, which is why a free flow of comments and positions is better than calling for moratoria. In this instance and more generally.
Do you really believe that until “this generation” discussion on “matters of intimacy” was reckoned properly to take place only between married couples? Perhaps I’ve misunderstood you – perhaps you mean that what consenting adults “get up to” is no concern of anyone else’s, and the Church should mind its own business. In which case I’m inclined to agree. But once the Church sets out to legislate for what kind of hanky-panky, and between whom, is acceptable, some agreement on the terms of the debate is surely vital? I am currently reading the splendid new book on Babylon by Lloyd… Read more »
as you linked this issue as part of your argument in the previous post this is the best rebuttal of Biggar and your other fellow travellers arguments I could find.
Thanks for this link.
A discussion on Project Spire deserves its own thread. I will set up a separate article for this purpose early next week, so that comments about that are not intermingled with comments on the two items linked in this article.
Matters of moral principle are rarely, even if they concern the principles of individual behaviour, out of season for discussion. Matters of actual individual conduct or behaviour are sometimes thought to benefit from a moment of reflection and discretion. There isn’t a paradox there, I think
I was replying to your remarks about the permission of open public discussion of intimacy, a term of abstract moral discussion, vs the closure of debate on matters of individual behaviour in the name of awaiting more information
Nigel Goodwin
4 days ago
The kikuyu rituals of Nguīko or ngweko have much to commend them. I don’t think much of that happened in church youth clubs, at least in my day.
The other thing worth noting is how intimacy changes between couples over time, either through inability or changing interest.
The Kikuyu also practised clitoridectomy, so maybe not the greatest of role models for the C of E…! But the training in ngweko is indeed a strong contrast with talking about cake icing.
What an extraordinary question? Is FGM one of those things which nice Anglicans shouldn’t think about, let alone (perhaps because God did forbid), talk about?
I do not understand what you are objecting to, Peter. Are you saying I am ‘allowed’ to use the word clitoridectomy but not to mention Mike Pilavachi’s much-mentioned cake icing image? In the original blog posts, I am quoting from published documents. Anything in “ “ quotes is a direct quotation rather than a use of ‘ ‘ scare quotes. I am quoting from documents published on church websites.
Yes, it is shocking to see Kenyatta’s advcacy of clitoridectomy – it was not that long ago. It maybe brings some balance to discussions on colonialism and the benefits of Christain ideals. There were other tribes (Ibeso) which did not practise that, but still had similar practices. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/cd6d/1a5e7dcfa34930f5c7eb018781024bcf3c76.pdf It is all a bit gruesome. But there is clarity over the language. There seems to be little mention of homosexual men or women, but I regard talk that they did not exist as being a bit fanciful. In my era of growing up, nothing below the waist was ever mentioned. Maybe… Read more »
Last edited 3 days ago by Nigel Goodwin
Gareth
4 days ago
I honestly don’t know what Helen realistically expects to get out of this.
Conservatives aren’t going to accept her position this side of heaven.
It doesn’t look like the deadlock in Synod is going to be broken any time soon.
So isn’t a negotiated settlement to split a better way forward where both sides can move forward?
Flesh this out a bit more. I wonder which raison d’etre could possibly mean that it’s better to duck heads in the sand than face reality both on this issue and on the place of the CofE in modern England. If it’s some idea that the CofE is meant to be a national church that ship sailed a very long time ago with 700k attending weekly. If we really must argue that the CofE is a national church despite this, the CofE should be a church that encourages people to turn from sin and trust in Christ rather than a… Read more »
At some point what you write will become so blindingly obvious that the ever shrinking population worshipping in the Church of England will have to face reality. It was one thing to hammer home the idea of a national church under the monarch in Elizabeth’s day, with parties at theological distance from one another obliged to trim their sails. We are in an entirely different universe at present. Numerically, culturally, theologically, practically.
The raison d’être I had in mind was the holding together of warring factions within the church, for the sake of unity, which, imperfect as it may be, may be understood firstly in spiritual terms of the third part of Jesus’ High Priestly prayer in John 17:20-23, and secondly in historical terms of the wars of the Reformation, with the Church of England maintaining an identity (again, imperfect as it may be) as both catholic and reformed. This identity has been maintained to this day by Anglicans who, while they may personally be more catholic, or reformed, or indeed liberal,… Read more »
I don’t think anyone thinks the CofE should encourage people to continue in sin, there are just disagreements about what things are sinful, as there have been throughout Christian history and about matters as weighty as taking up arms, executing criminals or enslaving people. Somehow the church managed to hold together through disagreements on all of these yet somehow some in the church recognising that in Christ there is neither male nor female is a deal breaker.
The text is crystal clear on this, it’s also clear it’s a salvation issue.
The arguments haven’t changed at all since J.I Packer left the Anglican Church of Canada in 2002.
No matter how much Helen wants to dwell on unimportant matters like what the word intimacy means, that reality remains unchanged in the mind of traditionalists and conservatives.
Surely the choice is keep banging heads against the same brick wall or go separate ways.
Like every single other church split right down the middle on this has.
Crystal clear? Let me offer you a few quotes from a leading conservative theologian on this issue from a book published twelve years ago. ‘The question of homosexuality defies simple answers. [Furthermore] we all have biases and presuppositions that we bring to the text. There is no such thing as an unbiased reading of the Bible.” (pp10,19) ‘You may find it shocking, but most scholars who have written books about homosexuality in the last forty years have concluded that the Bible does not condemn consensual, monogamous, same-sex relations.” (p23) (Preston Sprinkle. People to Be Loved: Why Homosexuality is Not Just an… Read more »
Gareth, I spent the best part of two years posting regularly on this site making regular appeals for a settlement through differentiation. It must have been wearisome for the moderators and with the benefit of hindsight a waste of my time. What became obvious was that the bishops will not entertain any such meaningful structural accommodation because they look back on the settlement over the ordination of women as a fundamental strategic and moral failure. They have no intention of repeating what they see as that mistake. An orderly parting of the ways is just not going to happen, Gareth.… Read more »
It’s not “every single other church” though, is it? There remain Presbyterians and Episcopalians in Scotland (and indeed congregations) who don’t agree with equal marriage or having clergy who are gay (or indeed female) yet have somehow managed to accept that others in their church disagree.
Stamping your feet and insisting that it’s “clear” you’re right is pretty meaningless. If you insist that the only way forward is schism then I’m sure someone can show you the door.
It’s pretty much every church with a 50/50 down the middle split. You can find no shortage of examples on the other side of the pond. Irrespective of characterising it as stamping feet ultimately the numbers don’t seem to be massively shifting to permit significant change. A clear way where that can happen is if there’s a parting of ways and both sides get to move forward. Otherwise it just looks like people have fun banging their heads against the same brick wall. Repeating the same thing and expecting different results seems to be the definition of foolishness to me.… Read more »
“ Repeating the same thing and expecting different results seems to be the definition of foolishness to me.”
As famously said Voltaire, Albert Einstein, Mahatma Gandhi, Mae West etc. etc.
I see little evidence of a 50-50 split though. I see something more like a 90-10 division! My personal experience across a number of churches in the Church of England and a wide range of churchmanship is that the overwhelming majority support the “progressive”, “inclusive” position. That may well not reflect the position of the leaders of their churches, and consequently they may be wary of speaking out. But in private, or in other forums their views are clear. Even I was personally somewhat surprised, for example, that the PCC of which I am a member unanimously voted recently to… Read more »
I specifically said across “a wide range of churchmanship”, probably outside my own parish they would mostly be described as conservative evangelical in e.g. their theology of the atonement. I accept your criticism of anecdotal evidence. However, my point is perhaps that numbers in synod reflect a level of commitment and organization (and that’s true on all sides) over and above that of ordinary churchgoers who have better things to do in life that stand for their deanery synod! Another anecdote: the parish of which I am a member was a “resolution parish”, prohibiting women from exercising any priestly ministry… Read more »
Gareth, you asked me to ‘flesh this out a bit more’, which I did. While you have not acknowledged my response to your request, you have responded to Jo B’s comment on the same subject, so I am replying to that instead. Jo refers to Galatians 3.28, and you reply that ‘The text is crystal clear on this, it’s also clear it’s a salvation issue.’ If you are referring to the same text, I would concur that it clearly states ‘there is no longer male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.’ I might also agree that… Read more »
‘This Synod recognises that there is a range of legitimate views on the issue of slave-holding in the contemporary church. These include views holding that slave-holding is compatible with Christian discipleship, and views holding that it is incompatible.’ Would such a motion be acceptable today? Would it have been acceptable in the C18/19 had the Synod existed then? If the C of E had formalised any such position at any stage, might it not have become a membership deal-breaker for some Anglicans, at some point in time? All sorts of views, opinions and errors can co-exist ‘on the ground’ within… Read more »
Tony Bellows
4 days ago
Helen writes: In these reports, the language of intimacy also features in regard to friendship, but the line is a thin one; sharing a bed when a person has night terrors can be part of an “intimate friendship” but not if this is done “repeatedly” It is interesting that she sees sharing a bed continually (but no more than that is seen as “intimacy”, because a look at historical poverty, or for that matter with poverty in other countries, sharing a bed to sleep in is a necessity because there is no room for separate beds. I hate to say… Read more »
Couldn’t agree more, Tony. But that sentence starts ‘In these reports’. It’s not what I think, it’s what the current position, as expressed in tribunal reports/abuse case reviews, appears to be. You are right that this is a very recent feature of some societies!
You are so right, Tony Bellows, about the “modern, middle-class, luxury”. My father (who fought in the Second World War as a very young man) had lived with his mother, brother and sister, in two rooms of a small house. I lived till I was 17 in a house with no bathroom and as a small child regularly shared a bed with my Welsh grandmother and aunts when visiting their houses. Can still remember how cosy and safe it felt even though I was invariably too hot sinking in to a squishy feather mattress with scratchy blankets.
Brenda
3 days ago
I would have preferred it if the PMM had stood as originally worded, but without obfuscation as to the meaning of ‘intimacy’. This is not a matter of culture wars for me; it is a matter of knowing where I stand with the Church. In some ways, I wish Synod could have an honest discussion about same sex ‘sex’ and sin, as that’s what lies at the heart of the matter. Instead, we tiptoe through the tulips, leaving those of us who long for a word of acceptance hanging on for that one little crumb. It’s a lonely old place… Read more »
Savi Hensman
3 days ago
Perhaps the level of ‘intimacy’ and whether it might be appropriate depends to some extent on the context of words or actions, including the relationship between (or among) the people involved? So what might seem unexceptional between two single people in their 20s on a dancefloor, surrounded by others, might be far more questionable if a teacher or youth leader is in a room alone with a young person in their care? Likewise siblings sharing a bed if there are several people trying to get a night’s rest in a house or flat with not many beds, or two friends… Read more »
Fr Dean
3 days ago
Heavens! Professor King is willing to go where others fear to tread. As an academic she uses a lot of words to describe the absurdity of the CofE’s position on hanky panky. We all know that the bishops don’t expect civil partners to conclude the evening with a chaste kiss as they switch off the television and retire to separate bedrooms. There’s that famous video clip of a young cleric live streaming himself saying Morning Prayer in his study during the pandemic, when suddenly his civil partner strides into the room not wearing so much as a stitch of clothing.… Read more »
David Runcorn
3 days ago
Thank you for these two frank, articulate and intelligent reflections on the use and mis-sue of language when discussing expressions of human love and desire.
Mark Bennet
3 days ago
The main problem with ambiguous or euphemistic language is when it is used to conceal a double standard or power play. For example, male pronouns for the generic human, which revert to referring to male human (male God) more often than is warranted by the sources, and in accord with the interpreter’s inherited norms (one might even say prejudices). This is also in play in the discourse around sexuality, sexual expression, affection, close friendship and intimacy. We end up having dishonest and unhelpful conversations which avoid us having to face our self-deceptions because we will not be clear. We can… Read more »
Naughtius Maximus
2 days ago
O dear! I thought this area of the internet might not be continually going back to homosexuality. I was clearly due to be disappointed. I had thought what St Paul had told us about it in 1 Corinthians 6 vs 9, and that was pretty clear. But then he basically said that women in the church should sit and shut up. We seem to have advanced from there. I do find it strange that “The love that dare not speak its name” has for 40 years or so been screaming it from the rooftops. But there we are. There is… Read more »
Naughtius Maximus. Your prostitute comment is perceptive. Yes, these people were often not regarded negatively within their contemporary culture. Perhaps because the word commonly translated as “prostitute” in our modern English Christian bible is often “kedeshim” or “kedesher”, with a meaning of holy man or woman. It refers to the widespread cult practise of the erotic or sexual being used within a religious context to facilitate transcendence and connection with the divine. This was accepted practise in many of the cultures represented in much of the early Hebrew scriptures, but later Christian scholars rejected such a thing, and choose to… Read more »
Naughtius Maximus
2 days ago
Final bit before I ran out of space:-
I think there is no easy answer- is there ever? But maybe one is that the church, armed with our CURRENT knowledge, should politely and humbly withdraw from this area? Maybe we should say, “It’s up to the individual, their make up, their relationship to God” and not for us to pontificate, censure, make rules, induce guilt.
And let’s just follow Jesus’s summary of the Law. We can’t go far wrong then- surely?
Kate Keates
1 day ago
I think the main point is being lost: if people use euphemisms and evasions in church communities they are being predisposed to using euphemisms and evasions in prayer – or worse, avoiding the subject entirely. I say that because it was something God recently taught me: my prayers were exemplar in their respectability. I was sanitising things for God, which is the sin of pride. I take – and took in my confession – full responsibility for my actions but I was aware it happened because church communities, liturgy, worship and sermons, sanitise language, and in so doing attempt to… Read more »
Simon Dawson
1 day ago
Helen King is right to try to move the debate away from sex towards intimacy and love. It might help is we paid attention to what gay scholars have been saying. For over 150 years now gay scholars have been arguing that there is more to homosexuality than the sex. Karl Ulrichs has been described as the world’s first out gay campaigner, and the first man to write academically about homosexuality (in 1860s Germany). He rejected the word “homosexual” precisely because it risked linking gayness only to the sexual act. He preferred the term “Uranian” or “Uranism”, derived from Greek… Read more »
hidden sister
1 day ago
I cannot agree with Helen more when she observes the variety of expressions that may be applied to the term intimacy. It’s too complex to be pinned down as if everyone expresses intimacy the same. In our sadly over-sexualised cultures, I feel we can lose sight of romantic love and tender care. It is entirely possible to be a devoted wife, and a sexual woman, and yet – like Elena Duglioli – to express intimacy through physical closeness, kissing, sleeping arm in arm… without any desire for insertion, erotic climax, or genital love-making. Devotion is what matters.
hidden sister
1 day ago
Two wonderful articles. They just go to show how we should not try to police one another’s expressions of intimacy, but to look to the love and devotion inherent in them, and pray God for grace and flourishing.
hidden sister
1 day ago
Professor King wrote: “It’s interesting how ‘ambiguous’ can become a dirty word when used in a Synod debate. The history of Christianity demonstrates instead that ambiguity has often been a deliberate choice, made in order to keep the maximum number of sheep within the fold… Is the Eucharist a commemoration or a sacrifice? The English Reformation found ways around the question; the first Prayer Book has famously been described as a “masterpiece … in studied ambiguity”, with both conservatives and reformers being able to use it. Like it or not, our current liturgy continues to hold this ambiguity, allowing worshippers to believe different… Read more »
I agree but would go further. One of the effects of Jesus teaching in parables is that the approach inherently embeds ambiguity. Also, as believers, we don’t all have the same calling and what is appropriate for some of us may be inappropriate for others. I would prefer a greater emphasis on teaching people how to exercise choice than a rules based faith some prefer.
How absolutely beautiful. Thank you, hidden sister.
Naughtius Maximus
1 day ago
“Would love your thoughts. Please comment”. Well, I’ve tried to but someone clearly doesn’t like them. Unless they disappeared into the luminiferous ether. But as it said they (for there were two) were awaiting approval and now have gone, it seems not all thoughts are welcome. And mine contained no profanity. No point in staying here for a reasoned debate, but I shall be at church as normal tomorrow am. And at 6pm too.
It is my common experience that posts will often be processed quickly during the week, but there will often be significantly longer delays over the weekend.
I would imagine that such a state is entirely understandable.
The level of control here is positively Soviet. Contrast Psephizo where comments appear at once and all comers are welcome. The censorship here is the chief problem.
That is not to say I don’t wonder quite why my posts are not allowed on a fairly regular basis.
Psephizo comments threads are a snake pit, frankly.
For the avoidance of doubt, I am a conservative evangelical
Martin Hughes
1 day ago
I think that intimacy is the opposite of reserve. Someone intimate with me mentally or intellectually knows my thoughts without concealment on my part and is, if having interest in the relevant matters, free to discuss them. Someone intimate with me physically knows my body without concealment and is, if sexual feelings are present, drawn to caress me – such is common usage, I think. Of course anyone in any discussion is permitted, if being clear about it, to state a personal definition of any word in use. I don’t see that we are able to solve moral or factual… Read more »
If language is the primary battleground in culture wars. Together for the Church of England appears to be engaged in a full on assault on the mainstream Christian Church and any possibility of unity. But I guess we already knew that. The English language however evolved out of the everyday use of the English bible, translated using everyday language, so perhaps that’s the place to start discussions about human sexuality. It’s really not that difficult to understand.
“The English language however evolved out of the everyday use of the English bible, translated using everyday language”
Really? I always thought that the AV (which I presume is the English Bible to which AC refers) was written in somewhat self-consciously archaic language. I wouldn’t want to underplay its cultural significance, but there’s a lot of English language – some of it religious – developing before 1611. I know St Paul used the AV, but….
Certainly an extreme Protestant view – not at all mainstream.
English discourse was and still is certainly very much influenced by the AV, though some of the famous phrases – ‘powers that be’/ ‘my cup runneth over’ – come, I understand, from the earlier work of Tyndale and Coverdale
Your characterisation of Together for the Church of England is wide of the mark. The organisation works for the unity of the church and the full inclusion of all. It does not encourage church’s to limit their parish share so that those it disagrees with cannot be financially supported. It does not promote irregular ordinations. It does not seek alternative forms of episcopal oversight. These are all policies and actions of The Alliance, which looks increasingly like a church within a church that cannot tolerate any deviation from its own particular worldview. In July 2026 Helen King, Vice-Chair of Together,… Read more »
My goodness we live in strange times. Open debate about public scandals are shut down on the grounds of impropriety.
Yet we are apparently happy to engage in public discussion on matters of intimacy which every previous generation would have recognised as a subject that should be the entirely private concern of couples who are married.
I find myself echoing the words of Rowland in a previous thread. Not words I ever expected to say !
Is this topic really a matter for public comment ?
Purely in interests of accuracy, I don’t recall using those words. A better summary would be Lord Asquith’s “wait and see”. You will be relieved to know that I’m not commenting about Helen King’s articles! I have read both.
Rowland,
My recollection is that you were perhaps a little more emphatic than you suggest, but your general point is well made.
I do not presume to know your vintage but I guess, like me, you recall the days when the social goods of decorum and discretion were understand.
Back then people made all the same mistakes, of course. However I doubt the vulgarisation of culture and discourse since those days is really progress.
Peter
Since apparently it’s OK to return to this topic, I do not believe you understood the objections being raised. They had nothing to do with innocence or guilt about the tragic death of a man; or ‘wait and see’ just what is said about that.
No, they had to do with facts already in the public domain for which there was no need for waiting about something else.
And, I too abstain from commenting on essays on the proper language to use about this or that sex act — as if this would move the needle somehow.
The facts may be in the public domain, but the elephants remain in shadows. i am hoping those elephants come into the light following various investigations (including Ghent).
I have just added my name to support an independent public enquiry.
https://goodlawproject.org/petition/jason-arday-letter/
I couldn;t find anything to debate in the letter. I can;t say that about all GoodLaw campaigns.
Maybe Christians of all flavours could also find it in themselves to support this, and show leadership?
Almost 149,000 signatories so far.
Nigel,
Do you understand what you are calling for by signing such a petition ?
An “ inquiry” based on the premise that a free press has failed.
Do you realise what it means to control the press ? History offers little encouragement for such ideas
I’m afraid we must ‘wait and see’. ‘Facts’ in the public domain must be factually accurate to merit respect and serious consideration. We now have to respect the editors’ decision to close this debate. I have no doubt that it will reopen in due course, although not necessarily in a religious context, nor hence on TA.
Just to be clear, you did not judge the matter “closed” as you yourself re-entered with: “Purely in interests of accuracy, I don’t recall using those words. A better summary would be Lord Asquith’s “wait and see”. You will be relieved to know that I’m not commenting about Helen King’s articles! I have read both.” And of course whether facts in the public domain are “factually accurate or not” is not for you to foreclose on, by fiat. Let us respect the generous flow of discourse without any hindrance or declarations from on high. TA has generally been good at… Read more »
I’m afraid that I don’t accept this, or the sophistry employed based on my very mild correction of what I am claimed to have said on the previous, now closed, thread. It was not I who reopened that matter. This had ceased to be primarily a subject for TA which I took to be the reason for Simon Sarmiento’s decision.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, which is why a free flow of comments and positions is better than calling for moratoria. In this instance and more generally.
Grace and peace.
Do you really believe that until “this generation” discussion on “matters of intimacy” was reckoned properly to take place only between married couples? Perhaps I’ve misunderstood you – perhaps you mean that what consenting adults “get up to” is no concern of anyone else’s, and the Church should mind its own business. In which case I’m inclined to agree. But once the Church sets out to legislate for what kind of hanky-panky, and between whom, is acceptable, some agreement on the terms of the debate is surely vital? I am currently reading the splendid new book on Babylon by Lloyd… Read more »
https://alanlester.co.uk/blog/the-argument-about-project-spire-and-the-real-history-of-the-church-of-england-as-an-enslaver/
Peter
as you linked this issue as part of your argument in the previous post this is the best rebuttal of Biggar and your other fellow travellers arguments I could find.
Thanks for this link.
A discussion on Project Spire deserves its own thread. I will set up a separate article for this purpose early next week, so that comments about that are not intermingled with comments on the two items linked in this article.
Matters of moral principle are rarely, even if they concern the principles of individual behaviour, out of season for discussion. Matters of actual individual conduct or behaviour are sometimes thought to benefit from a moment of reflection and discretion. There isn’t a paradox there, I think
Martin,
Could you confirm which of my comments you are addressing
Thanks
Peter
I was replying to your remarks about the permission of open public discussion of intimacy, a term of abstract moral discussion, vs the closure of debate on matters of individual behaviour in the name of awaiting more information
The kikuyu rituals of Nguīko or ngweko have much to commend them. I don’t think much of that happened in church youth clubs, at least in my day.
The other thing worth noting is how intimacy changes between couples over time, either through inability or changing interest.
The Kikuyu also practised clitoridectomy, so maybe not the greatest of role models for the C of E…! But the training in ngweko is indeed a strong contrast with talking about cake icing.
Helen,
Is it really necessary to tell us this ?
What an extraordinary question? Is FGM one of those things which nice Anglicans shouldn’t think about, let alone (perhaps because God did forbid), talk about?
Pam and Helen
The abuse of women is an outrage.
Please do not suggest that a refusal to follow your choices of vocabulary is a moral failure. It is not.
I do not understand what you are objecting to, Peter. Are you saying I am ‘allowed’ to use the word clitoridectomy but not to mention Mike Pilavachi’s much-mentioned cake icing image? In the original blog posts, I am quoting from published documents. Anything in “ “ quotes is a direct quotation rather than a use of ‘ ‘ scare quotes. I am quoting from documents published on church websites.
I’m genuinely puzzled. What vocabulary would you prefer?
you seem very unwilling to face historical facts, unlike Nigel
Yes, it is shocking to see Kenyatta’s advcacy of clitoridectomy – it was not that long ago. It maybe brings some balance to discussions on colonialism and the benefits of Christain ideals. There were other tribes (Ibeso) which did not practise that, but still had similar practices. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/cd6d/1a5e7dcfa34930f5c7eb018781024bcf3c76.pdf It is all a bit gruesome. But there is clarity over the language. There seems to be little mention of homosexual men or women, but I regard talk that they did not exist as being a bit fanciful. In my era of growing up, nothing below the waist was ever mentioned. Maybe… Read more »
I honestly don’t know what Helen realistically expects to get out of this.
Conservatives aren’t going to accept her position this side of heaven.
It doesn’t look like the deadlock in Synod is going to be broken any time soon.
So isn’t a negotiated settlement to split a better way forward where both sides can move forward?
What am I missing?
You are missing the raison d’etre of the Church of England
Flesh this out a bit more. I wonder which raison d’etre could possibly mean that it’s better to duck heads in the sand than face reality both on this issue and on the place of the CofE in modern England. If it’s some idea that the CofE is meant to be a national church that ship sailed a very long time ago with 700k attending weekly. If we really must argue that the CofE is a national church despite this, the CofE should be a church that encourages people to turn from sin and trust in Christ rather than a… Read more »
At some point what you write will become so blindingly obvious that the ever shrinking population worshipping in the Church of England will have to face reality. It was one thing to hammer home the idea of a national church under the monarch in Elizabeth’s day, with parties at theological distance from one another obliged to trim their sails. We are in an entirely different universe at present. Numerically, culturally, theologically, practically.
The raison d’être I had in mind was the holding together of warring factions within the church, for the sake of unity, which, imperfect as it may be, may be understood firstly in spiritual terms of the third part of Jesus’ High Priestly prayer in John 17:20-23, and secondly in historical terms of the wars of the Reformation, with the Church of England maintaining an identity (again, imperfect as it may be) as both catholic and reformed. This identity has been maintained to this day by Anglicans who, while they may personally be more catholic, or reformed, or indeed liberal,… Read more »
I don’t think anyone thinks the CofE should encourage people to continue in sin, there are just disagreements about what things are sinful, as there have been throughout Christian history and about matters as weighty as taking up arms, executing criminals or enslaving people. Somehow the church managed to hold together through disagreements on all of these yet somehow some in the church recognising that in Christ there is neither male nor female is a deal breaker.
The text is crystal clear on this, it’s also clear it’s a salvation issue.
The arguments haven’t changed at all since J.I Packer left the Anglican Church of Canada in 2002.
No matter how much Helen wants to dwell on unimportant matters like what the word intimacy means, that reality remains unchanged in the mind of traditionalists and conservatives.
Surely the choice is keep banging heads against the same brick wall or go separate ways.
Like every single other church split right down the middle on this has.
Crystal clear? Let me offer you a few quotes from a leading conservative theologian on this issue from a book published twelve years ago. ‘The question of homosexuality defies simple answers. [Furthermore] we all have biases and presuppositions that we bring to the text. There is no such thing as an unbiased reading of the Bible.” (pp10,19) ‘You may find it shocking, but most scholars who have written books about homosexuality in the last forty years have concluded that the Bible does not condemn consensual, monogamous, same-sex relations.” (p23) (Preston Sprinkle. People to Be Loved: Why Homosexuality is Not Just an… Read more »
Gareth, I spent the best part of two years posting regularly on this site making regular appeals for a settlement through differentiation. It must have been wearisome for the moderators and with the benefit of hindsight a waste of my time. What became obvious was that the bishops will not entertain any such meaningful structural accommodation because they look back on the settlement over the ordination of women as a fundamental strategic and moral failure. They have no intention of repeating what they see as that mistake. An orderly parting of the ways is just not going to happen, Gareth.… Read more »
It’s not “every single other church” though, is it? There remain Presbyterians and Episcopalians in Scotland (and indeed congregations) who don’t agree with equal marriage or having clergy who are gay (or indeed female) yet have somehow managed to accept that others in their church disagree.
Stamping your feet and insisting that it’s “clear” you’re right is pretty meaningless. If you insist that the only way forward is schism then I’m sure someone can show you the door.
It’s pretty much every church with a 50/50 down the middle split. You can find no shortage of examples on the other side of the pond. Irrespective of characterising it as stamping feet ultimately the numbers don’t seem to be massively shifting to permit significant change. A clear way where that can happen is if there’s a parting of ways and both sides get to move forward. Otherwise it just looks like people have fun banging their heads against the same brick wall. Repeating the same thing and expecting different results seems to be the definition of foolishness to me.… Read more »
“ Repeating the same thing and expecting different results seems to be the definition of foolishness to me.”
As famously said Voltaire, Albert Einstein, Mahatma Gandhi, Mae West etc. etc.
I see little evidence of a 50-50 split though. I see something more like a 90-10 division! My personal experience across a number of churches in the Church of England and a wide range of churchmanship is that the overwhelming majority support the “progressive”, “inclusive” position. That may well not reflect the position of the leaders of their churches, and consequently they may be wary of speaking out. But in private, or in other forums their views are clear. Even I was personally somewhat surprised, for example, that the PCC of which I am a member unanimously voted recently to… Read more »
If you’re primarily moving in liberal parishes perhaps…
I tend to leave anecdotal assessments aside in favour of the voting proportions in Synod itself.
I specifically said across “a wide range of churchmanship”, probably outside my own parish they would mostly be described as conservative evangelical in e.g. their theology of the atonement. I accept your criticism of anecdotal evidence. However, my point is perhaps that numbers in synod reflect a level of commitment and organization (and that’s true on all sides) over and above that of ordinary churchgoers who have better things to do in life that stand for their deanery synod! Another anecdote: the parish of which I am a member was a “resolution parish”, prohibiting women from exercising any priestly ministry… Read more »
Gareth, you asked me to ‘flesh this out a bit more’, which I did. While you have not acknowledged my response to your request, you have responded to Jo B’s comment on the same subject, so I am replying to that instead. Jo refers to Galatians 3.28, and you reply that ‘The text is crystal clear on this, it’s also clear it’s a salvation issue.’ If you are referring to the same text, I would concur that it clearly states ‘there is no longer male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.’ I might also agree that… Read more »
‘This Synod recognises that there is a range of legitimate views on the issue of slave-holding in the contemporary church. These include views holding that slave-holding is compatible with Christian discipleship, and views holding that it is incompatible.’ Would such a motion be acceptable today? Would it have been acceptable in the C18/19 had the Synod existed then? If the C of E had formalised any such position at any stage, might it not have become a membership deal-breaker for some Anglicans, at some point in time? All sorts of views, opinions and errors can co-exist ‘on the ground’ within… Read more »
Helen writes: In these reports, the language of intimacy also features in regard to friendship, but the line is a thin one; sharing a bed when a person has night terrors can be part of an “intimate friendship” but not if this is done “repeatedly” It is interesting that she sees sharing a bed continually (but no more than that is seen as “intimacy”, because a look at historical poverty, or for that matter with poverty in other countries, sharing a bed to sleep in is a necessity because there is no room for separate beds. I hate to say… Read more »
Couldn’t agree more, Tony. But that sentence starts ‘In these reports’. It’s not what I think, it’s what the current position, as expressed in tribunal reports/abuse case reviews, appears to be. You are right that this is a very recent feature of some societies!
You are so right, Tony Bellows, about the “modern, middle-class, luxury”. My father (who fought in the Second World War as a very young man) had lived with his mother, brother and sister, in two rooms of a small house. I lived till I was 17 in a house with no bathroom and as a small child regularly shared a bed with my Welsh grandmother and aunts when visiting their houses. Can still remember how cosy and safe it felt even though I was invariably too hot sinking in to a squishy feather mattress with scratchy blankets.
I would have preferred it if the PMM had stood as originally worded, but without obfuscation as to the meaning of ‘intimacy’. This is not a matter of culture wars for me; it is a matter of knowing where I stand with the Church. In some ways, I wish Synod could have an honest discussion about same sex ‘sex’ and sin, as that’s what lies at the heart of the matter. Instead, we tiptoe through the tulips, leaving those of us who long for a word of acceptance hanging on for that one little crumb. It’s a lonely old place… Read more »
Perhaps the level of ‘intimacy’ and whether it might be appropriate depends to some extent on the context of words or actions, including the relationship between (or among) the people involved? So what might seem unexceptional between two single people in their 20s on a dancefloor, surrounded by others, might be far more questionable if a teacher or youth leader is in a room alone with a young person in their care? Likewise siblings sharing a bed if there are several people trying to get a night’s rest in a house or flat with not many beds, or two friends… Read more »
Heavens! Professor King is willing to go where others fear to tread. As an academic she uses a lot of words to describe the absurdity of the CofE’s position on hanky panky. We all know that the bishops don’t expect civil partners to conclude the evening with a chaste kiss as they switch off the television and retire to separate bedrooms. There’s that famous video clip of a young cleric live streaming himself saying Morning Prayer in his study during the pandemic, when suddenly his civil partner strides into the room not wearing so much as a stitch of clothing.… Read more »
Thank you for these two frank, articulate and intelligent reflections on the use and mis-sue of language when discussing expressions of human love and desire.
The main problem with ambiguous or euphemistic language is when it is used to conceal a double standard or power play. For example, male pronouns for the generic human, which revert to referring to male human (male God) more often than is warranted by the sources, and in accord with the interpreter’s inherited norms (one might even say prejudices). This is also in play in the discourse around sexuality, sexual expression, affection, close friendship and intimacy. We end up having dishonest and unhelpful conversations which avoid us having to face our self-deceptions because we will not be clear. We can… Read more »
O dear! I thought this area of the internet might not be continually going back to homosexuality. I was clearly due to be disappointed. I had thought what St Paul had told us about it in 1 Corinthians 6 vs 9, and that was pretty clear. But then he basically said that women in the church should sit and shut up. We seem to have advanced from there. I do find it strange that “The love that dare not speak its name” has for 40 years or so been screaming it from the rooftops. But there we are. There is… Read more »
Naughtius Maximus. Your prostitute comment is perceptive. Yes, these people were often not regarded negatively within their contemporary culture. Perhaps because the word commonly translated as “prostitute” in our modern English Christian bible is often “kedeshim” or “kedesher”, with a meaning of holy man or woman. It refers to the widespread cult practise of the erotic or sexual being used within a religious context to facilitate transcendence and connection with the divine. This was accepted practise in many of the cultures represented in much of the early Hebrew scriptures, but later Christian scholars rejected such a thing, and choose to… Read more »
Final bit before I ran out of space:-
I think there is no easy answer- is there ever? But maybe one is that the church, armed with our CURRENT knowledge, should politely and humbly withdraw from this area? Maybe we should say, “It’s up to the individual, their make up, their relationship to God” and not for us to pontificate, censure, make rules, induce guilt.
And let’s just follow Jesus’s summary of the Law. We can’t go far wrong then- surely?
I think the main point is being lost: if people use euphemisms and evasions in church communities they are being predisposed to using euphemisms and evasions in prayer – or worse, avoiding the subject entirely. I say that because it was something God recently taught me: my prayers were exemplar in their respectability. I was sanitising things for God, which is the sin of pride. I take – and took in my confession – full responsibility for my actions but I was aware it happened because church communities, liturgy, worship and sermons, sanitise language, and in so doing attempt to… Read more »
Helen King is right to try to move the debate away from sex towards intimacy and love. It might help is we paid attention to what gay scholars have been saying. For over 150 years now gay scholars have been arguing that there is more to homosexuality than the sex. Karl Ulrichs has been described as the world’s first out gay campaigner, and the first man to write academically about homosexuality (in 1860s Germany). He rejected the word “homosexual” precisely because it risked linking gayness only to the sexual act. He preferred the term “Uranian” or “Uranism”, derived from Greek… Read more »
I cannot agree with Helen more when she observes the variety of expressions that may be applied to the term intimacy. It’s too complex to be pinned down as if everyone expresses intimacy the same. In our sadly over-sexualised cultures, I feel we can lose sight of romantic love and tender care. It is entirely possible to be a devoted wife, and a sexual woman, and yet – like Elena Duglioli – to express intimacy through physical closeness, kissing, sleeping arm in arm… without any desire for insertion, erotic climax, or genital love-making. Devotion is what matters.
Two wonderful articles. They just go to show how we should not try to police one another’s expressions of intimacy, but to look to the love and devotion inherent in them, and pray God for grace and flourishing.
Professor King wrote: “It’s interesting how ‘ambiguous’ can become a dirty word when used in a Synod debate. The history of Christianity demonstrates instead that ambiguity has often been a deliberate choice, made in order to keep the maximum number of sheep within the fold… Is the Eucharist a commemoration or a sacrifice? The English Reformation found ways around the question; the first Prayer Book has famously been described as a “masterpiece … in studied ambiguity”, with both conservatives and reformers being able to use it. Like it or not, our current liturgy continues to hold this ambiguity, allowing worshippers to believe different… Read more »
I agree but would go further. One of the effects of Jesus teaching in parables is that the approach inherently embeds ambiguity. Also, as believers, we don’t all have the same calling and what is appropriate for some of us may be inappropriate for others. I would prefer a greater emphasis on teaching people how to exercise choice than a rules based faith some prefer.
Thank you for articulating all this, and for recovering something precious in our conversations here.
How absolutely beautiful. Thank you, hidden sister.
“Would love your thoughts. Please comment”. Well, I’ve tried to but someone clearly doesn’t like them. Unless they disappeared into the luminiferous ether. But as it said they (for there were two) were awaiting approval and now have gone, it seems not all thoughts are welcome. And mine contained no profanity. No point in staying here for a reasoned debate, but I shall be at church as normal tomorrow am. And at 6pm too.
WEll, looks like it has now. Odd. Maybe a backlog.
It is my common experience that posts will often be processed quickly during the week, but there will often be significantly longer delays over the weekend.
I would imagine that such a state is entirely understandable.
The level of control here is positively Soviet. Contrast Psephizo where comments appear at once and all comers are welcome. The censorship here is the chief problem.
That’s a bit harsh,James.
That is not to say I don’t wonder quite why my posts are not allowed on a fairly regular basis.
Psephizo comments threads are a snake pit, frankly.
For the avoidance of doubt, I am a conservative evangelical
I think that intimacy is the opposite of reserve. Someone intimate with me mentally or intellectually knows my thoughts without concealment on my part and is, if having interest in the relevant matters, free to discuss them. Someone intimate with me physically knows my body without concealment and is, if sexual feelings are present, drawn to caress me – such is common usage, I think. Of course anyone in any discussion is permitted, if being clear about it, to state a personal definition of any word in use. I don’t see that we are able to solve moral or factual… Read more »