Mark Clavier Well-Tempered Formed for Faithfulness 2: The Turn Toward Managed Renewal
Colin Coward Unadulterated Love Brave Deans and (mostly ) silent Bishops – Living in Love and Faith – time to find our voices and courage
Neil Patterson ViaMedia.News What is Anglican Sex Anyway?
Gavin Drake Church Abuse
Colin Coward writes of Trump’s “erratic shits in behaviour” (sic), a wonderful Freudian slip. Beyond that, it’s another fine article.
Totally agree Freud would be proud of him!
I believe that the debacle over Living in Love and Faith should raise much more fundamental questions about the structure of the Church of England. It is now clear that the established Church of England has a homophobic bench of bishops. How did this come about ? Does the homophobic bench of bishops reflect an institutionally homophobic national church of England or is the selection process for English bishops institutionally homophobic? This matters because the Church of England is an established church. Is it acceptable that an institutionally homophobic institution should have the right to nominate members of our upper… Read more »
David, you raise an interesting set of questions. From my own experience, and from what I have been told by others who know more, I don’t believe that the majority of bishops are personally homophobic. Whilst some certainly are, I think a small majority of the bench are actually in favour of greater LGBTQ inclusion. I think the bigger problem is more that the selection process for bishops has produced a cohort of yes-men (and women) who are unwilling or incapable of seeing or acting outside the box. I see a direct analogy in the Labour Party at Westminster. In… Read more »
I loathe the term “homophobic”. Gets bandied about a lot; often just if somone doesn’t snap to attention and salute when the latest demand of a gay-persons’ organisation isn’t met. And it’s supposed to be about fear, isn’t it? Anyway, FWIW I don’t mind homosexual relationships and the logical thing that follows is that I don’t mind the concept of “Gay Marriage”. I did for a long time, but a bit like CS Lewis, having thought a lot about it, I have become a convert; albeit reluctant at first. Let’s just get on with it. But, like with women priests,… Read more »
Quite right; nobody should be forced to marry someone of the same sex if they don’t want to.
David, you rightly recognise that the CofE is the Established church. It has, by right, 26 Lords Spiritual in the House of Lords. It has been granted power to exempt itself from the laws it contributes to making that all others must obey as the law of the land. It is thus able to discriminate against women, to exempt what it calls ‘office holders’ from employment law, and requires them to retire at 70 y.o (unless ‘exceptional’, eg Abp Sentamu). Parliament’s Ecclesiastical Committee has recently ‘shown its teeth’ by declining to progress the Clergy Conduct Measure, citing lack of transparency.… Read more »
I wonder if we could stop using the term homophobic in regard to these kind of discussions. If there is to be genuine dialogue between those whose views differ on the questions of PLF, Stand alone services and same sex marriage then avoiding the term honophobic might do a lot to facilitate this.
Quite. I’ve never been afraid of homosexuals. Most of the ones I know and have known have been cheerful and gentle folk.
Homophobic is as homophobic does (and says).
Framing homophobia as a state of mind is a red herring, it is words and behaviour that impacts other people.
Dancing around the issue, using euphemisms to avoid the bald facts, helps no-one. If the LLF process has taught people anything it is that the homophobic wing of the church will accept only schism or the enforcement of their views, accommodation and compromise are quite literally anathema to them.
And yet you are equally trenchant in your views.
On the contrary, I am a member of one church and a regular attender of another which, while allowing equal marriage and permitting gay clergy, allow congregations to reject the latter and priests/ministers to refuse to conduct the former. I don’t think they *should* but I tolerate sharing a church with those that do.
In a post on Mark Clavier’s earlier piece, I reflected on how the parish church might shape lives in an HTB world, ending: “bloodless liberalism needs a Catholic heart: Eucharist as the action which makes the Church herself in time and place; trust in sacramental realism and in the liturgy’s slow, steady work of forming a people; priests as stewards of the mysteries.” In so far as HTB is a Church, it’s a Marmite church. The parish church can still draw in folk seeking rootedness over scale, transcendence over relevance and a story larger than themselves: Eucharist celebrated in… Read more »
Thank goodness for marmite. Thank God for HTB and its solid hold on truthfulness and refusal to “go with the flow “. When , in a few years, the C of E will be depleted to the extent the Church of Scotland and Episcopal Church of Scotland level ( post changing their canons) has diminished, HTB and others of a like mind will be thriving and holding the torch for solid orthodox witness.
And yet our numbers are going up. (Very ordinary, middle-of-the-road rural church)
Strange, then, that the Episcopal churches that solidly affirm same-sex relationships, like Glasgow Cathedral, are thriving. Trying to link the long term fall in attendance in SEC or the Kirk to equal marriage is an absurdity.
Yet again the opinions of liberals wrongly attributed to the desire to “go with the flow”.
The argument by CC and many others to the effect that God loves us all equally and unconditionally and that therefore there should be no discrimination between other-sex and same-sex feelings and actions but equal respect and esteem is one whose premise and conclusions are both completely valid but whose logic is not. There is a distinction between those passions and actions which accord with God’s will and commandments and those which are contrary, which God presumably wishes us to resist or change, though his love for us does not change if we fail. The question is which side of… Read more »
It’s very anthropomorphic to ascribe to God a distaste for certain sexual dispositions. I suggest many people who subscribe to a HTB view of human existence are akin to the view held by Mary Whitehouse, Malcolm Muggeridge and Cliff Richard in their Festival of Light movement in the 1960s. Their prudish stance seems very funny now. But it’s a pity that many guitar-playing, drum-banging ‘Christians’ today would make Mrs Whitehouse proud. The. CofE resembles a stuffy middle class housewife who frowns on people enjoying themselves.
There must be some sexual dispositions and desires that God would wish not to be gratified surely?
It is more likely that people project their own distaste for certain sexual proclivities onto a divine being saying He dislikes them too. It’s a bit like deciding whether God prefers tea or coffee. Human beings decide what is acceptable. It is illegal to rape someone because it is harmful and violent – not because God doesn’t find it gratifying!
The more I think about it, the more I find it faintly ridiculous that a deity should concern him/herself with, or care about, what people do with their genitalia in their free time.
Not just faintly ridiculous, it is utterly absurd
God is not concerned about sexually motivated violence?
Then you have never met anyone who has been deeply damaged by such actions.
I don’t think LJS was talking about sexual abuse. He was, I assume, talking about consensual adults, with no harm or pain being caused to others.
QUite: I made this clear in another post.
I wasn’t just talking about abuse either. I was responding to the quite extraordinary assertion that God isn’t concerned with the way people use their sexuality.
And there are many legal and consenting things that people do in private that are deeply damaging, both physically and spiritually. To say that God isn’t interested in this is just wrong. He is interested in our wellbeing and our happiness.
I think, William, that LJS, you and I, and others are in wholehearted agreement. A quick comment on a message board does not, of necessity, spell out all the whys and wherefores and conditions and everything. Of course nobody wants anybody to be damaged. I would have thought that to be so obvious it doesn’t need to be spelt out. Which sexual acts are damaging? List too long to write. But let us start with coercion between husband and wife, unwanted domination, control and everything else. Then let us move on to acts such as choking. I’m not going to… Read more »
I’m sorry but the quick comments on the message board are all I have to go on. And I am arguing against the widespread and very secular viewpoint (promoted by many on this site) that sexual activity is a kind of recreational form of self expression. It goes far deeper than this. The Christian understanding has always been that the body is not just a tool but part of the unity of the person. This unity can be damaged very easily and is the reason why God is most certainly interested in what people do with their bodies.
I think we are still in agreement – I am simply differentiating between mechanics and the effect. We all know that sexual acts can have profound consequences for our well being. It is an expression of deep intimacy. Breaking of that bond can lead to years of mistrust and confusion. But it is what the sexual acts signifies rather than the act itself? I mean, these damaging consequences can occur just as much between homosexual or heterosexual partners? so, in short, I’m not sure of the relevance wrt. LLF, PFL, same-sex marriage etc.? As Cortaza said, ‘los besos se multiplican’… Read more »
Then why is it just sex that obsesses the Church of England? Why doesn’t Synod debate fat people and those who drink too much and smoke cigarettes? Presumably God is upset mainly about gay people and not fatties?
Martin, thank you for your comment on my blog. I found myself thinking about where the line is drawn as I meditated this morning – the line that distinguishes between those passions and actions which accord with God’s will and commandments and those which are contrary. Who draws the line, or who decides where the line is drawn? Oh, I know the instant answer is to consult the Bible, and in relation to those of us who have “certain sexual dispositions”, proof texting and the use of the clobber verses, gives conservatives a clear answer. Does God draw the line… Read more »
Yup! And I am one who came from a different viewpoint until I switched on my brain. Those who want us to look to the Bible for clear answers are presumably not doing anything on the Sabbath? And certainly not expecting people to run power stations as that would be unbiblical. Or work in Air traffic control?
“There is a distinction between those passions and actions which accord with God’s will and commandments and those which are contrary, which God presumably wishes us to resist or change” I had to read that sentence half a dozen times and my mind still boggles at the heavy lifting which “presumably” has to do in this sentence.
It surely takes a particular kind of hubris to presume that we cracked the mind of God long ago. Isn’t that the inexhaustible mystery which religion is supposed to be forever exploring?
Is the disposition of God towards acts of violence and to the passions which demand the safeguarding of which we hear so much in doubt or a mystery?
No, Jesus was very clear. This assumes that Jesus’ words were accurately transcribed, and a belief in the Trinity so Jesus’ words may be taken as indicating the disposition of God.
Are there any particular words that you have in mind here?
Almost all of them? Of course Matthew 18:2-10 and Mark 9:42 are the most obvious. Jesus was angry.
I’m completely mystified as to where “violence” or “safeguarding” come into this discussion. Can you please clarify? The online training I did as chaperone to junior choristers did not feel it necessary to tell me that violence was unacceptable. Nor that the expression, in that context, of one brand of sexual “passion” would be more acceptable than others.
OK folks, I’m just a Grunt in the Church. Only recently have I bothered to look at the goings on in Synods (of all sorts) I’m not a theologian. Surely, isn’t the logical position that society changes; sometimes for scientific reasons. And we HAVE to adapt? And adapt as best we can. We ALL break the commandment to Remember the Sabbath. If not, the electricity and water will go off and hospitals will cease work one day a week. Barmy, I hope we agree. So, the Seventh Commandment came along at the time of a completely male-dominated society with no… Read more »
Is this post intended as parody ?
Just the view of the man or woman in the pew, as the author confesses.
It is nothing of the sort, Matthew.
People in the pew are not vacuous and shallow in their thinking.
Ah, I’m vacuous and shallow because I don’t agree with you?
You must answer that question yourself.
Matthew attributed the sentiments in your post to the people in the pew.
That was a mistake.
All generalisations are a mistake. If he had said ‘some people in the pew’ it would make more sense.
Or if Matthew had said ‘view of A man or woman in the pew’.
Er…. including “all generalisations”?????
Absolutely! All statements which state something about all members of a class are incorrect.
Or maybe a bad debating approach – you only have to find one counter example to demolish the argument.
Check out Thurless Straight and Crooked Ways of Thinking. oldie but Goodie. Every word.
Never use, or imply, ‘all, none, never, always’
Nigel,
You are in error. There certainly are universal generalities
All people die and face the judgement of God.
Enoch did not die.
Elijah did not die.
Our Lady did not die.
So you are wrong.
Add Jesus himself.
This is getting a bit silly. Facing the judgement of God – I have no idea what that means either, what is the nature of this God? Is God sitting on a throne somewhere?
Jesus DID die!
It says so in the mass.
Ok. so the mass is the source of all truth? I’m going out of this discussion, obviously Jesus died, but rose again. He was unique. He is not contained with the class ‘all people’.
You added him!
Lazarus and the Widow of Nain’s son also snuffed it and then bounced back. Are they similarly excluded from the class ‘all people’?
Not for the first time, you are muddled in your analysis. Lazarus is not still walking around. He was resuscitated – not resurrected.
He died – like all people do
You are clearly “splitting hairs”, Nigel
But we haven’t heard much of your view. What about hospitals and power staions on the Sabbath? Or, as stated, all our graven images? I bet everyone covets something, but those of a “biblical” mindset might say they haven’t broken it as they’ve never coveted an ox or an ass?
BTW, I think I am only averagly vacuuous. They’ve tolerated my vacuity as CW for 30 years and PCC Sec for about 35. Apologies for spelling BTW, I’m mildly dyslexic and dyspraxic, but it’s no big deal.
I did not say you personally are vacuous. I do not know you. You are involved in the life of your local church and that is admirable
Only a bishop would speak like that.
what an odd remark.
LJS addressed himself directly to me and has perhaps been personally wounded by my comments.
I am simply observing that I admire him for his contribution to the life of the church. The laity can attempt to be kind as well as the episcopate.
No they aren’t. But most of them do think in the broad and and generous way that LJS does, however much their clergy may want them to be models of themselves. Why not address LJS point, Peter? If very few Christians take any notice of the fourth commandment now, and have never taken any notice at all of the second (my church is full of graven images), why should the seventh commandment not be similarly negotiable? If the church has adapted to to a society that produces 3D representations of people and animals, and now one in which every day… Read more »
The important thing is to go back to primary and secondary. God (and the bible) is not particularly interested in our fiddly bits, whatever one’s views of the nature of God. However, God is interested in whether we love or harm each other, particular children and existing partners. [even saying ‘God is interested…’ or ‘God’s will’ raises all kinds of dilemmas about the nature of God. How can the ‘ground of our being’ be interested in what our being thinks and does? By the effect it has on the ‘ground of our being’ of ourselves and others? ] Says ‘an… Read more »
Fair points, with which I agree. It’s almost insulting to think that in 2026 God is interested in what adults do with their genitals in a mutually consenting situation.
Nigel, I am very happy to agree with your paragraphs two to five. As for paragraph one, I have no idea whether God is interested in in our fiddly bits, but I would argue that the Hebrew scriptures have a lot of text discussing people using their fiddly bits, but a lot of it in ways that would now be labelled queer. But, ref your para 2, some of the queer activity described in these scriptures was loving and healthy, and some of the heterosexual activity was abusive and violent, and these stories were important. Look at the story of… Read more »
Was the relationship with Bathsheba abusive?
Matthew, I think scholarship is changing over the years. Traditional scholarship which wanted to see David as a hero put the blame on Bathsheba. Many older pictures show her bathing on the rooftop and flaunting herself, whereas in fact it was David on the rooftop looking down into the privacy of Bathsheba’s home or courtyard. More recent scholarship questions this, and wonders whether the David narrative contains a criticism of David’s toxic masculinity and lack of self-control. Was this relationship consensual or forced? The story’s conclusion would certainly provide a poetic ending to such a narrative. David demented and impotent… Read more »
Women have sexual needs too, and it seems that Uriah wasn’t at home very much.
Agreed, we need readings that portray women as independent sexual beings with agency, like Tamar with Judah, but my reading of David/Bathsheba is still that David behaved badly but Bathsheba was able to restore balance.
I acknowledge that many other readings are available.
He was the King. She had a choice? I don’t think so.
I think we are agreeing too on my first para.
I thought my 3rd para might provoke a never ending debate on what we mean by ‘God’s will’ – I must check what Tillich et al says about it. No doubt all the ordained ministers here have thought about the issue for many years. I tend to go back to basics, given my training as a theoretical physicist, but others are no doubt more useful and pastoral.
I’ve always thought that in the days of Moses, life expectancy was a lot less than now. I reckon that a child born today, so long as there are no mass extinctions, might well have a life expectancy of 100 years.
That’s me! Though I am a vacuous churchwarden and PCC Secretary.
And hence better acquainted with the views from the pews than Peter
Matthew,
You do not the faintest idea what acquaintance I have with the pews.
No. It’s to make people wake up. I wish I could reach more people.
I would avoid to much synod watching. It can lead to a state of clinical depression and certainly tend to erode faith.
Fair point! I’m missing my Deanery Synod next week, so I can play Bridge. (A late invite came along.) It’s better for my mental health; you are spot on!
I once missed a deanery synod to catch up on my ironing. I posted on social media that this was a better use of my time and got an episcopal ticking off for doing so!!
I have never attended a deanery synod.
I admire your commitment to common sense and decency.
It’s just that I am always washing my hair on those evenings.
LOL! I’m not putting my Bridge on FB. But Deanery Synods are an almost complete waste of time. IMO
Indeed they are. I was once included in an e-mail chain started by our then deanery secretary asking if there was anything for the agenda for the forthcoming synod, as there was no business. I replied saying that the meeting should be cancelled if there was no business, but was ignored. Meeting for the sake of meeting was deemed to be essential.
The church described by Mark Calvier sounds little more than the reheated left overs of a once great Imperial Religion called Anglicanism. Yes liturgy does provide a great deal of biblical truth, but it should not be surprising that renewal leads to a proliferation of new projects, just as it did in the New Testament. The the emergence of something new or more correctly being restored is happening and those that walk by the Spirit, live by the Spirit. This is how disciples are formed.
Hoping to find that “once great Imperial Religion called Anglicanism” – at least, 60s Church of Ireland Choral Mattins followed by sherry with the Rector – I too am disappointed with Mark Clavier’s piece.
To be clear, I wasn’t trying to reheat anything in that piece. Rather, I was trying to understand the dramatic transformation of Anglicanism during the past 100 years. While I don’t think there’s any ‘going back’ (even if one so desired), I’d like to believe that there’s an alternative to our adopting an equally imperial corporate culture. Having said that, I’m not sure ‘imperial’ is the right term to describe the confident Anglicanism of yesteryear, though it undoubtedly had a long imperial phase. What I sought to describe of a bygone Anglicanism owed more, I think, to Crown and parish… Read more »
Imperialism takes many forms, including the imperialism of project management. I think there is a need to rediscover the many gifts of the Spirit. A BCP handbook of how to do Church is as good as a handbook on project management and a gifted priest shaped by the Spirit is as good as a project manager shaped by the same Spirit, to achieve the same goal.
The Russian Revolution also led to a proliferation of new projects and ways of doing things. That in itself is not a sign of the Spirit at work. Restorationism has always primarily been arrogance with spiritual dressing.
“Mark is a theologian, author, and public speaker with a diverse background in history, theology, and pastoral ministry. Originally from Greenville, South Carolina, Mark grew up in Florida and Virginia.”
Bio to help Brits place Fr Clavier, in case of doubt.
And as such brings a broader perspective, I feel. In a week that began with Burn’s Night, “O wad some Pow’r the giftie gie us to see oursels as others see us!”
And he has motored around in the lil’ ol’Uk on more than the odd vacation too, and I believe his current post is in somewhere called Wales ….