Helen King sharedconversations Concluding without ending: what happens next with Living in Love and Faith?
Alice Goodman Prospect Clerical life: Jesus isn’t manly enough for the far right
Michelle Burns Guarding the Flock I Was a Diocesan Safeguarding Adviser: When a PR Firm Controls the Narrative, Truth Becomes Optional
You have to wonder why something that God has created, sex, has become distasteful to talk about. I don’t think Gen Z have any worries on that score and sometimes lives are so messy that avoiding talking about it does not help. I don’t recall Jesus stepping back from asking difficult questions, What is the truth? Might be the appropriate question that PLF side steps and people are left picking up the pieces of a conversation that was never had.
The Church of England talks about little else. There should be a moratorium on talking about sex for a least a hundred years.
The CofE (and churches in general) manages to talk about sex while barely mentioning in terms anyone not thoroughly versed in church-speak would understand. I sometimes wonder if things would be easier if we just talked directly about which sexual acts people think God has a problem with (i.e. whether it’s really just male-male anal sex or everything that isn’t cis male husband’s penis in cis female wife’s vagina missionary mostly clothed with the lights off sex).
Or we could follow the example of previous generations and show sense of discretion and decorum in matters of speech.
Obfuscation is neither discretion nor decorum.
adults are perfectly well aware of the nature of the matters to which you are referring. They really do not need pictures drawing for them.
It has nothing to do with finding a remedy for obfuscation.
Actually it is not always clear what the issue is. Some people seem to object to same-sex couples even when they are chaste (as Jeffrey John found out); some espouse views on the purpose of sex that would seem to rule out e.g. oral sex or mutual masturbation regardless of the gender of the couples. When even the word “sodomy” has narrower and broader meanings specificity is needed. This ambiguity is used to elide the fact that the conclusions arising conservative sexual “ethics” are often Biblically tenuous and are alien to most Christians’ understanding of sex.
Yes, I think I went down that road a little when discussing God’s attitudes to fiddly bits and BDSM (although I misspelt that!). Something to do with a discussion on harm rather than mechanics.
I still have a problem with language such as ‘God has a problem….’. I know it is colloquial, but what does it really mean?
It dawns on me that BDSM never made it onto the LLF
agenda. Shame really. We could have had a good 20 years or more of wrangling over all that sort of thing.
A little 20 page booklet on exactly which kinds of acts were, or were not, willed by God? With a 300 page theological introduction?
I was rather looking forward to august synodical debate on materials devised by the liturgical commission for optional use at weddings, such as the blessing of a spanking paddle, and the optional rite of the couple being joined at the wrist by handcuffs before being pronounced man and wife. Such things, of course, would need a series of task and finish groups to prepare the way.
And what about zoophilia, eh???
“Fiddly bits” — so English. What a term.
Of course, in this context, being “fiddly” isn’t the issue…
I had a question in an internal General exam paper when I was in the sixth form.
‘The public discussion of sex theory is becoming a bore. Discuss’.
The year ? 1964.
To be fair, sexual intercourse had only begun the previous year, so it was in the forefront of people’s minds.
…and just in time for me.
I agree with you, Adrian. “What is the truth?” is the most important question in this whole area. But honesty will lead us to the awareness that, whatever we believe the answer to be, we cannot be 100% certain. This is also a truth, and one about which we CAN be certain. That must be the starting point for considering the next question: what should the church’s teaching be?
That’s my beef really. It’s what LLF had sought to answer, although anyone with project management skills knew it was bound to fail, and hasn’t and so we have PLF. What’s the truth? has never been properly answered and so we enter this brave new world where truth has been set aside, and it doesn’t end well for anyone.
Alice Goodman, do you remember Charlie Kirk? Maybe you should think about him as well.
Charlie Kirk’s murder was appalling. And so were most of his very right-wing opinions.
Tyler Robinson was caught and charged, and is in custody. Maybe you should think about that, next time you put your thinking cap on.
Alice,
If you are in Holy Orders you are not really supposed to “return fire”.
Are you seriously suggesting that because Alice Goodman is in orders, she doesn’t have the right of reply? What nonsense! The world, including this Board, is full of people in orders ‘returning fire’, as you put it.
Many of us here are nowhere near Holy Orders. We just try to be courteous and wear a belt of truth. Which maybe leads us back to the current US administration.
I did not say she has no right of reply.
If you read her comment it is perfectly obvious what I mean.
Nope.
Always different rules for women in the church & they need to particularly remember that male egos are very fragile.
Who said anything about different rules for women ?
There are men in Holy Orders as well as women
I’ve heard of friendly fire. I suppose this is loving fire among Christians
LOL!
I would characterise much of the conservative reaction to PLF as “returning fire”. What do you see as the difference?
She was quite right to do so. Clergy aren’t meant to be doormats.
You have entirely misunderstood what I have said.
The clergy – in particular those who publish articles – have a public platform. They do their arguments no favour if they are visibly affronted.
Thinking Anglicans should be interested in ideas !
It is not necessary to reduce everything to the level of personal sensibilities – and to be clear, I am not referring to Alice here, but to the frankly ridiculous over reaction to my perfectly calm comment on her piece.
Just been listening to this. No comment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq3piSqe1z8
Maybe one comment. Don’t think we are immune to this in the UK.
An interesting and thought provoking piece. Given we have seen the so called ‘March for Jesus’ in London and another planned for Birmingham it does raise the question – what does it really mean to be a disciple of Jesus in this moment? Who is the Jesus we are following? We will all have to ask this of ourselves I suspect, and be radically truthful in our inner work and answer. Thank you for the link. These are thoughtful men of courage.
Alice Goodman’s essay was about how Christian groups in the US and elsewhere are at risk of cosying up to fascist adjacent governments and other major players, and the risk that this has for women. So she is discussing the actions of these groupings, not specifically the murders. When it comes to Charlie Kirk, whilst his death was appalling, the victim was praised and the killer was criticised and arrested. The reaction of these governmental and Christian groups was entirely appropriate. Compare and contrast that to the killing of Renee Good. In this case the killer was praised and defended,… Read more »
Please, Simon.
Do not drag me into your agitation over American politics
Peter, just like Alice, my agitation is very much over British politics, and British church politics.
We are just using the US as an example of what could happen here if we are not careful.
“We are just using the US as an example of what could happen here if we are not careful.”
Kindly spare us such crude, global, simplifications.
“We are just using England as an example of what could happen here if we are not careful.”
This is supposed to be a place of “Thinking.”
Many of us “thinking” English people can’t understand what Americans were “thinking” when they elected Trump.
The English elected Johnson
That was equally mad
I don’t know. Johnson was a feckless fool but he wasn’t actually demented and didn’t preside over paramilitary goon squads kidnapping people in the street and shooting others in the head for peacefully challenging them.
Thinking Anglicans ought to think and in the area of Anglicanism. The rest is personal opining hour. Boris J is not as bad as Donald T is not as bad as SS officers emptying out real ashes from gas chamber ovens. Stop. No, he is worse. At some point historical specificity is emptied of any moral character. If everyone is Adolf Hitler, Adolph Hitler is just like us when we are being objectionable as others judge that. Gas chamber equals Minneapolis, viola.
I’m not even sure what you’re trying to say here. No-one mentioned Hitler but you.
And how do string instruments fit into the argument?
Well that’s a relief. D Trump isn’t Hitler and the ICE isn’t the Gestapo (the latter, a very efficient killing machine; the former a murderer of countless Jews, Priests, Gypsies, and homosexuals).
Anti-ICE “protestors” at the Sunday morning worship in Cities Church.
“The attack itself was ugly—and the ugliness didn’t come from the Cities Church faithful. Protestors shouted at children, “Do you know your parents are Nazis? They’re going to burn in hell.” Amid the disturbance some must have wondered if this was the lead-up to another church shooting. The chaos and confusion were part of the plan.”
From whose polemic are you quoting? It’s unfortunate that children were upset, but at least they’ve not been locked up or seen their parents car-jacked by ICE and dragged away at gunpoint. Do you delight in focussing on a minor excess when gross offences are happening all around?
We don’t know how many of the people ICE have kidnapped will be dead before their reign of terror is ended, and the comparisons with the Gestapo, while not exact, are legitimate in terms of their public behaviour, lack of apparent restraint or proportionality. Historical comparisons don’t have to match in every detail to be relevant, and comparison with Nazi Germany mostly references that there were a number of steps on the road to the einsatzgruppen and the gas chambers, starting with relatively minor abuses of power and disregard for the rule of law long before escalating to wholesale slaughter.… Read more »
I liked Michelle Burns’ article but was somewhat surprised that firms like Luther Pendragon ever were involved. Explains a lot. I’ve said it before, and to anyone who will listen, (and forgive me if I said it here) that, as my PCC’s safeguarding lead, were it not for the fact that all the people in our smallish rural church are chums, I’d have left the C of E over this issue and the failure to take it seriously even now. (The latest report residing in the long grass.) Haven’t a clue where I’d go though. We don’t hear much about… Read more »
I’m so pleased not to be the first person leaping in about articles on Safeguarding- or lack of it! I thought Michelle Burn’s article was excellent and the timing was interesting coinciding as it did with the election of the new Archbishop. ( I really wish her well but the circumstances around survivor N are not a good start) I think the result of all the money spent on spin has lead to a situation where systems relating to ordinary employees and parishioners have improved dramatically over the last few years- read the purring reports of Ineque- but those at… Read more »
“We don’t hear much about abuse in other denominations;”
I don’t know what sort of bubble you would need to live in to not be aware that over the past thirty or forty years there has been some slight discussion of abuse in the Catholic church, which has resulted in occasional articles in the media and the odd comment by its leaders.
Perhaps you have noticed that in Ireland, the Catholic Church has had some little local difficulties, which have resulted in, oh yes, the almost total collapse of its influence?
But right, we don’t hear much about that.
The RCs are not the only denomination, are they? What about the Methodists, Orthodox, the Brethren, the JWs, the Seventh Day Adventists???? And all the “Vine Churches”? Maybe you think there are only the two?
The churches you list are individually (perhaps even in total) a fraction of the size of the CofE and the RC church in England. They are also much more loosely organised, and don’t have a central body in the same way.
Of those, the largest single denomination is presumably Methodism. It has most certainly looked at it:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32909444
Do other Christian churches have this (unhealthy?) fixation on safeguarding? To me it seems to overwhelm any other issue, including preaching the Gospel. I agree that there have been failures by individuals as will always be the case (wheat and tares) but there must be a balance. Perhaps TA’s lenten discipline could be to avoid any comments / discussion on sex and instead to look at positive signs of life and growth in the church.
It’s not just that John Smyth and Peter Ball were sexual criminals It’s that a lot of people rallied around to support, enable and defend them. That’s why safeguarding is necessary: that the institution’s first response to sexual assault is to close ranks and protect the abuser.
They didn’t support, enable and defend them because they were sexual predators. They did so because they were people of power and influence who managed to present a righteous and impressive persona, coupled with a ‘Teflon’ aura. Therein lies the complexity of many a safeguarding issue. Part of this ‘front” is to assume a stance of victim hood which complicates the issue even further. I could tell you of three cases (one ongoing) where there is scepticism, denial and even downright unbelief that X could have done this or that, and this sort of thing is evidenced by the many… Read more »
Dr Wallace, I wonder whether all our victims and survivors think there is an unhealthy fixation on safeguarding, and when they will get any compensation rather than the lawyers and PR firms?
Spot on! It is a MASSIVE issue. There should never be a safeguarding issue in a Christian organisation. I think the main “fixation” is that it hasn’t worked, probably isn’t working and that our Church is not fit for purpose. We should hang our heads in shame.
As a Baptist, I can say that the Baptist Union of Great Britain takes this issue seriously; it has carried out a comprehensive Past Case Review and recently updated its training, following Government guidelines. However I wouldn’t say that we have become “fixated” on the issue and we certainly don’t have the labyrynthine and top-heavy bureaucratic structures that seem to be constraining the CofE in this matter. Of course we are a much smaller body; however I think the main reasons are (i) that we are not ‘established’ and hence tied into the same legal and parliamentary processes; and (ii)… Read more »
Well in my view, for what it’s worth, safeguarding is absolutely integral to preaching and living the Gospel. Failure to act responsibly and justly to safeguarding failures, or to belittle them, or cover them up, or suggest they are just the failings of a few ‘rogue’ individuals continues to undermine the very essence of the message of God’s love to the world. Failure to continually strive to create safer spaces within our faith communities simply perpetuated the abuse that has severely impacted the reputation of our churches and the Gospel message we proclaim.
True! Look at the things Jesus said about children.
Safeguarding and sex are two separate issues, although they may overlap sometimes.
Did you not get the memo?
I hope I am not bullying you – that would be a safeguarding issue!
[remember Father Ted – ‘that would be an ecumenical matter’].
whilst also avoiding the contentious subject of theology – it’d nearly as bad as sex for stirring up disagreements.
Alice Goodman has a poet’s sensibility in her use of language.
I also seem to remember her once referencing Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language” in an article ! An essay that is essential reading for every public speaker.
If we had more people in pulpits with her literary erudition and imagination we would be in a better place.
However, she goes to far in her conflation of religion and politics.
Also America – like the past – is a different country. They do things differently there.
But their money, their books, and their ideas are being pushed into our churches and our politics.
Shocked by today’s news of the arrest of a journalist reporting on a protest.
It was in USA, not Iran.
Slightly pertinent here as it was a protest within a church.
Alice’s piece is interesting. It reminds me that we need to continue to frame a “real man” repeating some insights from decades ago; there is nothing new under the sun. Back in the 1990s when we were reflecting on Iron John around people such as Roy McCloughry, we asserted, and I continue to assert, that a “strength / violence / hard as nails” orientation gives a 2d, stunted man. Just like anti-refugee perversions of our faith, we can refute it initially from the assertions about the alleged “evangelical” values. To me the important things are if we choose to do… Read more »
America is a divided and troubled country, but there is some astonishingly simplistic comment about the country on this thread.
They have a remarkable capacity to rise from the ashes of their own (frequent) blunders.
If you want to worry about something can I suggest you pay attention to the Chinese Communist Party.
Why? China isn’t a democracy but some places really don’t value the concept. Sometimes a one-party state is helpful in stopping it descending into tribalism. I’d not advocate it for much of Europe, but if you want a modern example, look at Yuoslavia once Tito died.
China has existed for 4,000 years. Yugoslavia existed for 85 years.
They are really not the same
Why then do you think that Long John Saliva should be worrying about the Chinese communist party?
The Chinese Communist Party is not China.
It is a revolutionary movement that does not have your (or anybody else’s) best interest at heart
But you still don’t explain why Long John Saliva should be losing sleep over it.
Matthew,
I did not say he should be losing sleep over it.
If people want to think about geopolitics, then the CCP is a much more malign threat than the USA.
Is that what the Daily Telavivgraph tells you?
China has not been militarily involved anywhere outside its borders since 1945. It has no military bases outside its borders.
It’s people are much happier with the governance of their country than people of the USA are with theirs.
Tell that to the Uyghurs
Why? Are you not suspicious that there are not vast numbers of Uighur refugees in Pakistan or Kirghizstan? Or that there are not great rallies and protests in sympathy with their fellow allegedly persecuted Muslims in those countries? Why is interest in Uyghurs limited to the right wing in Western countries? Do you not wonder whether you are being taken in by propaganda?
It is difficult to know if you are being serious, Matthew.
If you genuinely think there is some vast right wing conspiracy at work, there is no scope for further conversation.
I asked why it is that the alleged plight of the Uyghurs is only of concern to people of a decidedly right wing political leaning in the western world – people who are generally rather unsympathetic towards Muslims and Islam. Do you have an explanation?
South China Sea?
It has the best interests of the people of China at heart.
You need to read any standard modern history of China.
Whilst you are at it, a brief study of the recent history of Hong Kong would do no harm
Any modern history of China would show it to be a prodigiously successful country, leading the field in pretty well every field of human endeavour. I suspect you don’t know many Chinese people.
Why on earth do you image you know the company I keep and the newspaper I read ?
We will leave it there Matthew. I wish you well
That’s covered by Thouless’ Straight and Crooked Thinking. The fact that B is worse than A does not excuse A. But I agree, many commentators are very naive about USA. It is clearly divided and troubled. I have lived and worked there a bit, and have friends on both sides of the track. There is great heterogeneity. I find it best to think of it as a third world country with a first world veneer. Small number of highly educated comfortable citizens, but many not so much. We all know stories of geography. I was once asked ‘how long did… Read more »
Just been reminded that this is also called whataboutery. i don’t think the term was around in Thouless’ time.
You appear to be commenting on my observation about criticisms of America.
It was neither “whataboutery” nor was it your “B is worse than A etc.” argument.
That is just not what I said.
I was observing that analysis of America is shallow and prejudiced in much comment on this blog.
I then made an entirely separate point about the CCP.
A wearisome feature of exchanges on this blog is the focus on just finding fault in semantics where none exists
I think you will see on reflection that i was mainly agreeing with you. My A and B was simply in reference to your comment on CCP v. USA.
I have been an occasional visitor to Thinking Anglicans for several years, and I have found much of interest and some enlightenment from it. But the personal attacks and hostility on this thread provide more heat than light and leave me thinking I might spend my time better elsewhere. Is this the best we Anglicans can do?