I fail to understand Colin’s “ life in all its fullness “ project cannot coexist with the remarkable work of HTB and its linked churches. Reading some of his output I detect a denial of a supernatural God , perhaps, reinforcing his negative take on the current state of affairs in the C of E. To hold this position, after so much drift from orthodoxy, almost seems ungrateful.
Geoff, the work of HTB and its linked churches is indeed remarkable to me for the homophobic use of the Bible and the deep-rooted prejudice that infects the HTB ‘product.’ In the HTB churches I’ve visited since returning to London, every member of staff of each church that I’ve spoken with declined to discuss homosexuality, telling me that their ‘hierarchy’ had told them never to talk about it. I’m not denying a supernatural God. I’m affirming the presence of the supernatural and the supernatural God within all creation and within every human being. This is a deeply orthodox belief that… Read more »
Adrian Clarke
16 days ago
Karl Barth was right, theology based on human experience rather than revelation from God is simply a reflection of itself.
Adrian, you personally think Karl Barth was right. I think Barth is wrong is stating that theology based on human experience rather then revelation from God is simply a reflection of itself. This belief is wrong because revelation itself is something mediated by human beings. Human beings get things wrong. The mindset of the Christian Church today is in a very unhealthy state because so many people believe, and are taught to believe by the Church, that reflecting on ourselves and our own wisdom and experience results in a stance of not listening to God. What we have become less… Read more »
Much to agree with here, Colin, from a conservative perspective. The latter part of your comment is of course closely linked to John 14:23: the Father and Jesus dwell with those who love them, and so listening to the inner world is a nourishing activity for a Christian.
I’ve spent time yesterday and today reading and re-reading Yazid Said and Mark Clavier’s blogs carefully. I was feeling despondent about the future of the Unadulterated Love blog, but their blogs, combined with two articles in today’s Guardian, have fuelled new ideas in me. Mark’s ideas about post-Christian Christianity echo my own experience and analysis of what’s going on around the planet in this century. Post-Christian Christianity is indeed a gross distortion of Christian essence, as Mark says, and is certainly making it more challenging for me to have confidence in what I believe is the essence of Christianity. I… Read more »
“I’m very unsure about what the genuine content of practices, discipline, and doctrinal form that demands something of us might be.” Thankyou, Colin. This really is the question, isn’t it? Where I am, we have for the past year had daily silent meditation. A small group take part (usually fewer than 10) and we are wondering together, what else? Once a week our time of silence is followed by conversation and coffee. Some of us have done some mindfulness training where the emphasis on kindness is central. If we can increase the amount of non-judging kindness (to ourselves and one… Read more »
Nigel – thank you for your post and for writing about your small group meeting for silent meditation. I’m returning to books and authors that for the past 60 years have laid the foundations of my faith and spirituality. They include Bede Griffiths, a Roman Catholic Benedictine monk (who might be deemed acceptable by the righteous traditionalists guarding the faith) and Eckhart Tolle, author of The Power of Now, and not a Roman Catholic Benedictine (who for this reason is not deemed an acceptable person from whom to learn about contemplative wisdom and practice). I need to blog about both… Read more »
Colin, Like you I valued Mark Clavier’s blog, which I thought had some pertinent things to say. But I was struck by this paragraph: “Post-Christian Christianity moves in the opposite direction. It’s less concerned with Christian beliefs and doctrines than with the signs by which it is recognised. It understands the power of symbols and slogans in a crowded public square, and so it reaches for Christian language and imagery as instruments—useful, adaptable, and readily deployed in the service of political ends. Instead of Scripture shaping its vision of reality, a prior framework—often nationalist, or more loosely ideological—selects and selects… Read more »
Lors Constantin dit ces propres paroles –
J’ai renverse le culte des idoles!
Mais tous mes soins pour Sa Grandeur Supreme
N’eurent jamais d’autres objets que moi-meme
Voltaire, wittily but very unfairly, I think. Constantine was a man of the most real faith. He didn’t in fact obliterate paganism but what he did was an astonishing achievement. Empire and Church proved to fit each other well, as is foreseen in the final passages of Acts
Martin, you are correct. Empire and Church proved to fit each other well. But the interesting question to me is what distortions the church had to accept in order to turn the church into the imperial sect. There is that famous closing sentence in George Orwell’s animal farm: “The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which” By the fifth Century one could look from church to state, and from state to church, and from church to state again; but… Read more »
This is a fairly standard “take” on the evils of Constantine much beloved by evangelicals. It has also been robustly rejected by historians as bordering on romantic individualized religion of the self.
Anglican Priest, Thank you. But the texts I have been looking at have been quite complimentary towards Constantine, seeing him as a fairly benevolent leader for the time, but someone willing to appear to be Pagan when dealing with Pagans, and Christian when dealing with Christians. There is actually remarkably little surviving hard data evidencing Constantine’s own personal religious views, as distinct from later (often much later) hagiography. If I have a “take” on the evils of the time, it is to criticise what changes the various Christian writers and leaders made to their church and teachings in order to… Read more »
Your personal views about what you call an “imperial cult” come through quite clearly. I sense that modern takes on Constantine run far less in the direction of hagiography (see Voltaire above) than in seeing Christianity as the oppressor. I was on the Island of St Honorat for a retreat a couple weeks back. It is famous for a fortress abbey (presently under renovation). Built so the monks could continue their prayers during the piracy years of the fading Saracen threat in the region. That threat was no-nonsense, especially in Provence. We are not in the world of ecumenical dialogue… Read more »
You are right, Anglican Priest, Christians have had different experiences in history; sometimes engaged in ecumenical dialogue, sometimes as the oppressed, and sometimes as the oppressor. But I was simply trying to correct something in Mark Clavier’s blog. He presents a picture of Christianity as the passive victim, having its symbols and texts seized against its will by secular powers, to use in ways divorced from Jesus’ original intentions. And this is the main picture in contemporary UK, with Christian leaders communally pushing back against it. But I just wanted to say that at other times, in the late Roman… Read more »
“in a way that distorts the original gospel message” — this is question-begging in the extreme.
I think a more accurate statement is “in a way that distorts what I hold to be, for me personally, an original Gospel message.”
I also think there is considerable evidence that Christianity came under threat from external, warring forces determined to exterminate it. Whose symbols, convictions, gods, habits demanded that activity as part of the “original gospel message” of their religious and cultural warp and woof.
And it seems to me that this is a reality you seek to deny and underplay.
It’s interesting that some ‘progressive’ advocates within the church suggest that it would be good for the State to remove ecclesiastical exemption from, for example, the Equalities Act. In other words, aligning the church with the dictates of the secular power. This move has been advocated on TA threads from time to time. A paradoxical keenness, in the eyes of some, to align the church with secular power ‘in a way that distorts the original gospel message’. But as AP notes, it depends on what you, personally, hold the ‘original gospel message’ to be, and how keen you are to… Read more »
The Equality Act 2010 makes ‘religion or belief’ one of the Act’s nine ‘protected characteristics’. Section 10 defines it in these terms: 10 Religion or belief(1) Religion means any religion and a reference to religion includes a reference to a lack of religion. (2) Belief means any religious or philosophical belief and a reference to belief includes a reference to a lack of belief. (3) In relation to the protected characteristic of religion or belief— (a) a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a person of a particular religion or belief; (b)… Read more »
But we are, as church, allowed to discriminate on the basis of protected characteristics in some cases, aren’t we.
A company can’t refuse to consider someone for a job simply because they are, for example, female or Hindu.
Whereas a job vacancy like a flying bishop, or vicar of certain parishes can be legally restricted to male applicants, and a parish youth worker restricted to committed Christians, n’est ce pas?
Quoting from a Government statement dated 24th June 2022:
“There are not specific exemptions for the Church of England from equality legislation, although there are exemptions for religion or belief organisations”.
In other words, the C of E is on the same footing as other religion or belief organisations by legislation which Parliament enacted as appropriate for all such organisations. I don’t think I can usefully add anything further.
Anglican Priest, your second paragraph is interesting. You seem to be criticising my wanting to think and research for myself, or wanting to have a personal response to the gospels. That seems, to me, to be an interesting position for a Christian academic to take on a platform labelled Thinking Anglicans I mentioned Catherine Nixey before. She recently said this about heresy. “Heresy is a Greek word and it sounds like a bad word to us, heresy came to mean a bad thing. But in ancient Greek- it comes from the Greek word “haereomai” my which means “I take for… Read more »
Peter Heather’s recent ‘Christendom’ seems impressive. He thinks he can identify the stages through which C progressed, from crypto-Christian to guardian of the Church
As Jesus said ‘The kingdom of God is forcefully advancing and forceful people lay hold of it’ for good or ill, depending on your point of view and view of history. What can’t be stopped is that the kingdom of God will continue to advance. How people respond is up to them, but on TA, on the whole, it’s negative.
Martin, Thank you. I got a lot from Alice Roberts “Domination” and Catherine Nixey’s “the Darkening Age”. Both women are coming at it from being trained in history and classics scholarship, but not personally Christian. And there is a lot of value in such scholarship. But Heather’s book might provide a different perspective. I will take a look.
The ‘After Christendom’ series sponsored by the Anabaptist Network in the UK, edited by Stuart Murray Williams, is particularly useful on this subject. Also the work of Will Willimon, Stanley Hauerwas, and others.
And yes, Jesus does sometimes expect his followers to die for their loyalty to him, rather than kill their attackers. What exactly did we think ‘Take up your cross’ meant?
There is the position of Hauerwas and Anabaptism and there is the position of Augustine, Aquinas and Niebuhr, to name but three. These are all Christian positions, seeking warrants in scripture and the history of doctrine. https://firstthings.com/moral-certitude-and-the-iran-war/
Personal fulfilment and ethical niceness are not to be despised. If more people achieved these the world would not be a worse place.
It might be important to speak disturbingly where there is scandal and complacency in the face of it. I would like to see more non-complacency or less silence about the Middle East
I fail to understand Colin’s “ life in all its fullness “ project cannot coexist with the remarkable work of HTB and its linked churches. Reading some of his output I detect a denial of a supernatural God , perhaps, reinforcing his negative take on the current state of affairs in the C of E. To hold this position, after so much drift from orthodoxy, almost seems ungrateful.
Geoff, the work of HTB and its linked churches is indeed remarkable to me for the homophobic use of the Bible and the deep-rooted prejudice that infects the HTB ‘product.’ In the HTB churches I’ve visited since returning to London, every member of staff of each church that I’ve spoken with declined to discuss homosexuality, telling me that their ‘hierarchy’ had told them never to talk about it. I’m not denying a supernatural God. I’m affirming the presence of the supernatural and the supernatural God within all creation and within every human being. This is a deeply orthodox belief that… Read more »
Karl Barth was right, theology based on human experience rather than revelation from God is simply a reflection of itself.
Adrian, you personally think Karl Barth was right. I think Barth is wrong is stating that theology based on human experience rather then revelation from God is simply a reflection of itself. This belief is wrong because revelation itself is something mediated by human beings. Human beings get things wrong. The mindset of the Christian Church today is in a very unhealthy state because so many people believe, and are taught to believe by the Church, that reflecting on ourselves and our own wisdom and experience results in a stance of not listening to God. What we have become less… Read more »
Much to agree with here, Colin, from a conservative perspective. The latter part of your comment is of course closely linked to John 14:23: the Father and Jesus dwell with those who love them, and so listening to the inner world is a nourishing activity for a Christian.
I’ve spent time yesterday and today reading and re-reading Yazid Said and Mark Clavier’s blogs carefully. I was feeling despondent about the future of the Unadulterated Love blog, but their blogs, combined with two articles in today’s Guardian, have fuelled new ideas in me. Mark’s ideas about post-Christian Christianity echo my own experience and analysis of what’s going on around the planet in this century. Post-Christian Christianity is indeed a gross distortion of Christian essence, as Mark says, and is certainly making it more challenging for me to have confidence in what I believe is the essence of Christianity. I… Read more »
“I’m very unsure about what the genuine content of practices, discipline, and doctrinal form that demands something of us might be.” Thankyou, Colin. This really is the question, isn’t it? Where I am, we have for the past year had daily silent meditation. A small group take part (usually fewer than 10) and we are wondering together, what else? Once a week our time of silence is followed by conversation and coffee. Some of us have done some mindfulness training where the emphasis on kindness is central. If we can increase the amount of non-judging kindness (to ourselves and one… Read more »
Nigel – thank you for your post and for writing about your small group meeting for silent meditation. I’m returning to books and authors that for the past 60 years have laid the foundations of my faith and spirituality. They include Bede Griffiths, a Roman Catholic Benedictine monk (who might be deemed acceptable by the righteous traditionalists guarding the faith) and Eckhart Tolle, author of The Power of Now, and not a Roman Catholic Benedictine (who for this reason is not deemed an acceptable person from whom to learn about contemplative wisdom and practice). I need to blog about both… Read more »
Colin, Like you I valued Mark Clavier’s blog, which I thought had some pertinent things to say. But I was struck by this paragraph: “Post-Christian Christianity moves in the opposite direction. It’s less concerned with Christian beliefs and doctrines than with the signs by which it is recognised. It understands the power of symbols and slogans in a crowded public square, and so it reaches for Christian language and imagery as instruments—useful, adaptable, and readily deployed in the service of political ends. Instead of Scripture shaping its vision of reality, a prior framework—often nationalist, or more loosely ideological—selects and selects… Read more »
Lors Constantin dit ces propres paroles –
J’ai renverse le culte des idoles!
Mais tous mes soins pour Sa Grandeur Supreme
N’eurent jamais d’autres objets que moi-meme
Martin, you are correct. Empire and Church proved to fit each other well. But the interesting question to me is what distortions the church had to accept in order to turn the church into the imperial sect. There is that famous closing sentence in George Orwell’s animal farm: “The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which” By the fifth Century one could look from church to state, and from state to church, and from church to state again; but… Read more »
This is a fairly standard “take” on the evils of Constantine much beloved by evangelicals. It has also been robustly rejected by historians as bordering on romantic individualized religion of the self.
Anglican Priest, Thank you. But the texts I have been looking at have been quite complimentary towards Constantine, seeing him as a fairly benevolent leader for the time, but someone willing to appear to be Pagan when dealing with Pagans, and Christian when dealing with Christians. There is actually remarkably little surviving hard data evidencing Constantine’s own personal religious views, as distinct from later (often much later) hagiography. If I have a “take” on the evils of the time, it is to criticise what changes the various Christian writers and leaders made to their church and teachings in order to… Read more »
Your personal views about what you call an “imperial cult” come through quite clearly. I sense that modern takes on Constantine run far less in the direction of hagiography (see Voltaire above) than in seeing Christianity as the oppressor. I was on the Island of St Honorat for a retreat a couple weeks back. It is famous for a fortress abbey (presently under renovation). Built so the monks could continue their prayers during the piracy years of the fading Saracen threat in the region. That threat was no-nonsense, especially in Provence. We are not in the world of ecumenical dialogue… Read more »
You are right, Anglican Priest, Christians have had different experiences in history; sometimes engaged in ecumenical dialogue, sometimes as the oppressed, and sometimes as the oppressor. But I was simply trying to correct something in Mark Clavier’s blog. He presents a picture of Christianity as the passive victim, having its symbols and texts seized against its will by secular powers, to use in ways divorced from Jesus’ original intentions. And this is the main picture in contemporary UK, with Christian leaders communally pushing back against it. But I just wanted to say that at other times, in the late Roman… Read more »
“in a way that distorts the original gospel message” — this is question-begging in the extreme.
I think a more accurate statement is “in a way that distorts what I hold to be, for me personally, an original Gospel message.”
I also think there is considerable evidence that Christianity came under threat from external, warring forces determined to exterminate it. Whose symbols, convictions, gods, habits demanded that activity as part of the “original gospel message” of their religious and cultural warp and woof.
And it seems to me that this is a reality you seek to deny and underplay.
It’s interesting that some ‘progressive’ advocates within the church suggest that it would be good for the State to remove ecclesiastical exemption from, for example, the Equalities Act. In other words, aligning the church with the dictates of the secular power. This move has been advocated on TA threads from time to time. A paradoxical keenness, in the eyes of some, to align the church with secular power ‘in a way that distorts the original gospel message’. But as AP notes, it depends on what you, personally, hold the ‘original gospel message’ to be, and how keen you are to… Read more »
The Equality Act 2010 makes ‘religion or belief’ one of the Act’s nine ‘protected characteristics’. Section 10 defines it in these terms: 10 Religion or belief(1) Religion means any religion and a reference to religion includes a reference to a lack of religion. (2) Belief means any religious or philosophical belief and a reference to belief includes a reference to a lack of belief. (3) In relation to the protected characteristic of religion or belief— (a) a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a person of a particular religion or belief; (b)… Read more »
But we are, as church, allowed to discriminate on the basis of protected characteristics in some cases, aren’t we.
A company can’t refuse to consider someone for a job simply because they are, for example, female or Hindu.
Whereas a job vacancy like a flying bishop, or vicar of certain parishes can be legally restricted to male applicants, and a parish youth worker restricted to committed Christians, n’est ce pas?
Quoting from a Government statement dated 24th June 2022:
“There are not specific exemptions for the Church of England from equality legislation, although there are exemptions for religion or belief organisations”.
In other words, the C of E is on the same footing as other religion or belief organisations by legislation which Parliament enacted as appropriate for all such organisations. I don’t think I can usefully add anything further.
Anglican Priest, your second paragraph is interesting. You seem to be criticising my wanting to think and research for myself, or wanting to have a personal response to the gospels. That seems, to me, to be an interesting position for a Christian academic to take on a platform labelled Thinking Anglicans I mentioned Catherine Nixey before. She recently said this about heresy. “Heresy is a Greek word and it sounds like a bad word to us, heresy came to mean a bad thing. But in ancient Greek- it comes from the Greek word “haereomai” my which means “I take for… Read more »
You might find the arguments here good to throw into your thinking mix.
https://firstthings.com/moral-certitude-and-the-iran-war/
I wasn’t arguing for Christianity under Constantine being inherently evil. You were.
I was challenging that view as somehow based on, what you called, “the original Gospel message.”
I’d be loathe to declare something “the original Gospel message” as it sounds, well, unthinking.
best wishes to you as well.
Peter Heather’s recent ‘Christendom’ seems impressive. He thinks he can identify the stages through which C progressed, from crypto-Christian to guardian of the Church
As Jesus said ‘The kingdom of God is forcefully advancing and forceful people lay hold of it’ for good or ill, depending on your point of view and view of history. What can’t be stopped is that the kingdom of God will continue to advance. How people respond is up to them, but on TA, on the whole, it’s negative.
Martin, Thank you. I got a lot from Alice Roberts “Domination” and Catherine Nixey’s “the Darkening Age”. Both women are coming at it from being trained in history and classics scholarship, but not personally Christian. And there is a lot of value in such scholarship. But Heather’s book might provide a different perspective. I will take a look.
The ‘After Christendom’ series sponsored by the Anabaptist Network in the UK, edited by Stuart Murray Williams, is particularly useful on this subject. Also the work of Will Willimon, Stanley Hauerwas, and others.
And yes, Jesus does sometimes expect his followers to die for their loyalty to him, rather than kill their attackers. What exactly did we think ‘Take up your cross’ meant?
There is the position of Hauerwas and Anabaptism and there is the position of Augustine, Aquinas and Niebuhr, to name but three. These are all Christian positions, seeking warrants in scripture and the history of doctrine.
https://firstthings.com/moral-certitude-and-the-iran-war/
Personal fulfilment and ethical niceness are not to be despised. If more people achieved these the world would not be a worse place.
It might be important to speak disturbingly where there is scandal and complacency in the face of it. I would like to see more non-complacency or less silence about the Middle East