Anon’s contribution is really important. Although loudly proclaimed by Evangelicals, every member ministry isn’t an idea I can find in the NT. But if all members are or should be ministers, this must surely mean every member DBS checks. But since CofE churches don’t have members, does this mean that all Electoral Roll applicants need to be checked, or all new worshippers? In today’s Gospel (Trinity 1), Jesus says ”I came not to call the righteous but sinners”. The importance of Safeguarding is obvious, but safeguarding procedures can appear to proclaim that our churches are only for the righteous. Perhaps… Read more »
I don’t think that what we have in 1 Cor. 12 is ”every member ministry”. What Paul is talking about are different spiritual gifts given for the building up of the Christian community. Can these be described as ”ministries”? I’m a little surprised that you don’t refer to Ephesians 4. 11-13, where the basic message seems to be the same, but where there seem to be more distinct roles. But there doesn’t seem to be any suggestion at all that every member is expected to have one of these roles – or ministries. It is, after all, obvious amongst the… Read more »
Ephesians 4.11-12 says that he gave some to be apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers ‘for the perfecting of the saints for the work of ministry’ (or ‘service’). So I would agree with you that the author of Ephesians doesn’t expect all Christians to be either apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors or teachers, but he does expect them all to be perfected to the work of ministry. But perhaps you’re using ‘ministry’ in the sense of what we now think of as ministerial work (pastoral, liturgical, homiletical, sacramental etc.). I think those who argue for every member ministry are using it… Read more »
What Paul – or whoever – says is ”for the equipping (rather than ”perfecting”?) of the saints for the work of service (diakonia), for the building of the body of Christ”. I would agree that this can be thought of as ministry if the word is used in the wider sense, by which I think that we both mean the internal building up of the Christian body by the members of that body. However, I remember the time when ”every member ministry” was used in Evangelical circles to suggest that all Christians should be evangelists. I certainly cannot find that… Read more »
Bible hub gives several possible translations of ‘katartismon’ – ‘equipping’ is the most common today, but ‘perfecting’ is also listed. I don’t think all Christians are called to be evangelists, but I do think all Christians are called to be witnesses. Is this what you mean when you say ‘Yes, I do remember 1 Peter 3.15″? When I was a little boy the Sunday ‘work of the clergy’ in the C of E was to read the entire service—including Bible readings, intercessions, the lot—and to administer both bread and wine at Holy Communion. Nowadays we usually expect lay people to… Read more »
I think that ”perfecting” is best avoided as it can suggest ideas of ”Christian perfection”. The basic meaning of the verb -if one can speak of ”basic meanings” – is ”to fit out”, as one fits out a boat to make it ready to be launched. It is what James and John were doing to their nets in Mark 1.19. Christians are most certainly called to bear witness to our faith – called by Jesus himself ( Matt. 10.32-33). Martyrs are those who bear witness at the cost of their lives. But as you say, this isn’t the same as… Read more »
I would say that every spiritual gift entails a ministry. We are ‘a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation’, as Peter put it. Each of us has something to contribute, as Paul says, and we are expected to exercise the gifts we are given for the benefit of all. What I don’t see in the NT is the concept of a sacramental priesthood. Which is not to say it’s wrong, because the Church has developed in all sorts of ways since the earliest days, as was to be expected. But I do think it’s wrong to speak of… Read more »
The catechism in TEC’s prayer book says, “The ministers of the Church are lay persons, bishops, priests, and deacons.” Note that laypeople are listed first. The catechism then provides, “The ministry of lay persons is to represent Christ and his Church; to bear witness to him wherever they may be; and, according to the gifts given them, to carry on Christ’s work of reconciliation in the world; and to take their place in the life, worship, and governance of the Church.” (TEC BCP, p. 855) All Christians are called to ministry. Most Christians are not called to ordained ministry but… Read more »
Quite right. Paul includes ‘administration’ among the spiritual gifts, and that covers a multitude of kinds of service. I don’t think the lists of gifts and offices in Romans, Corinthians, and Ephesians were meant to be exhaustive: the Spirit is endlessly creative in gifting people to serve the church and community.
Indeed. The book “Are all Christians ministers? by the RC lay theologian John Collins is a salutary counterblast to much wooly theology around ministry. His discussion of the punctuation of Ephesians and the way that has changed over the decades is an important – and it would suggest convincing part of his argument even if he does get a bit polemical along the way.
The book was much in vogue with Anglican bishops 30 years ago and deserves to be dusted off and read again.
As does his earlier book on ‘diakonia’ in which he offers a major corrective to understanding ‘diakonos’ simply as servanthood, while also exposing the fragility of the slogan ‘every member ministry’. The latter, he says, flattens all ministry into the discipleship of the baptized. But he then undermines his case by appearing at times to come close to restricting ‘ministry’ in any meaningful sense to the ordained. That said, his books serve as a much needed counter to the easy rhetoric of ‘all member ministry’. In particular, they ought to be compulsory reading in those dioceses where the Chrism Eucharist… Read more »
Is there a case for 1 Peter 4:10 making this point in the New Testament?
Pat ONeill
21 days ago
Of course Christians should not (and cannot) withdraw from politics, but they should avoid making political arguments based solely on their own denominational doctrine and dogma. That leads to evangelical vs. traditional, Catholic vs. Anglican, or any other way of being Christian against the others.
Rerum novarum
21 days ago
Interesting piece by Snow and Gildea. Worth noting that from the start Christianity has acknowledged a separation between temporal and spiritual power (‘Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s’) and that Vance was in some ways defending the US constitution, which includes a separation of church and state and state. Also worth remembering that politicians stand for election, which few religious leaders bother to do, with the exception of pioneers like Jesse Jackson. Lastly, useful to reflect that politics is largely technical. It’s rarely good vs evil, but often the cumulative effect of decisions that… Read more »
J D Vance said the Pope should be careful when he talks theology. Obviously this is preposterous. Similarly his boss’s claim he was posing as a doctor when he was depicted as Jesus was offensive. So, too, when Trump was dressed as the Pope. How does this ensure separation of Church and State? Without the support of right- wing evangelicals, these absurd people couldn’t spread their divisive policies throughout the world. Trump once posed with a bible outside an Episcopal church. The bishop of Washington told him to stop using their building as a prop.
One job of the US government is to resist foreign potentates (good or bad) telling them what to do. It’s 250 years since they stopped us doing that, and I don’t know any Americans who view that as a mistake. I was surprised when I was in America how the separation works. I thought it would weaken the church but actually it makes it much stronger. Because it’s independent, the church is free to be itself. Conversely, the state is free to ignore the church. In the end, hopefully, the most rational approaches win out. We hold these truths to… Read more »
Obviously you are not keeping abreast of US politics. The White House is governed by a foul-mouthed autocrat who cares little for the rights of others. Many people who challenge him are subject to law suits and intimidation. Not least, our own BBC.
Yes, the powers invested in the US government are derived from the consent of the governed. So skilful politics involves a degree of charm, and broadening the consensus you have – that makes for a more cohesive society in which people are happier and it’s easier to get stuff done. Think Reagan. However, it remains the case that Trump has won two elections, each involving about 200 million Americans. The Pope has won one election involving about 800 people, of whom ten were from the USA. So Trump has roughly 40 million times more consent to govern America than does… Read more »
Your suggestion that the Pope wasn’t elected to run America is incredibly funny. It would obviously have been better if he had! Millions of Americans voted for an inveterate liar who claims President Biden was never elected; who has withdrawn support from Ukraine and threatened Greenland; supported genocide in Gaza and killed thousands through his war in Iran. His policies have made the quality of people’s lives more unaffordable while he has filled the pockets of his own family. The administration is the most corrupt in American history. You say Trump has 40 million times more consent to run America… Read more »
Thank you Rowland. I did get the number of USA electors right at ten, which gives the factor of 40 million times more us citizens involved in trump’s successful elections.
I wondered whether RN was adding in a second tier involved in the election of a pope. Cardinal electors are in theory named by the pope, but in reality they are recommended to the pope after a process of discernment within the curia.
I think I see where you might be coming from: just the population of Vatican City? That seems to me to be an entirely fallacious argument in this context. ‘Catholic Herald’ states that Pope Leo leads 1.4 billion followers.
He was, however, elected by 49.8% of the popular vote. That sobering fact is the reason why, here in Canada, we can’t just assume that the problem will go away when he’s gone. A massive proportion of Americans thought it was a good idea to elect him.
FrDavid, I don’t disagree with you on this; I just want to keep emphasising that it’s not just Trump and his family and his cronies who are the problem, it’s also the massive number of American voters who think his hateful agenda is just fine. Here in Canada we used to trust our neighbours to the south; I don’t expect that to come back in my lifetime.
The fact that 40% of Americans think its quite okay to have a president who refuses to stop talking about making our country the 51st state does not fill Canadian hearts with joy and trust in our neighbours, Pat.
i was in Houston during his first election, eating breakfast in a hotel which was being used as a polling station. I chatted to someone – he said he didn’t like trump, but disliked Clinton even more.
I’m not sure whether I’m supposed to find that reassuring. I repeat, from a Canadian point of view, the fact that almost 50% of those who cast their ballots thought that the guy who regularly threatens to annex our country was preferable to the alternative is not a fact that encourages us to quickly return to our former trust in our southern neighbours.
The irony is that, although separation of church and state is in the US Constitution but not the Canadian Constitution, the separation is much sharper here in Canada, whereas in the USA, Trumpian evangelicalism seems to be the state religion right now. No Canadian prime ministerial candidate parades their religion to get votes; no American president could get elected without at least pretending to be religious.
I think this is one reason why the shorthand “separation of church and state” isn’t what the founding documents say. Government may not establish religion. Citizenry exercise the right to worship as they wish without government constraint. Trump doesn’t attend church; has been publically upbraided by Christianity Today and Franklin Graham both. American evangelicalism is not a monolith (speaking as an outsider) and it has a strong Stott-Keller wing concerned for social action alongside the older conversionist Billy Graham wing (I gather he was mildly concerned with his son’s tilt toward the former). The arminian and calvinist tension is always… Read more »
Tim, you remember the attempts of the Harper Government to intimidate churches and other charities who were too ‘political’ for the government’s liking?
i do indeed! I also remember Michael Peers saying that in 1998, in the aftermath of the crash of Swissair Flight 111, Christian clergy involved in the nondenominational memorial service were asked by the Chretien government not to mention Jesus in their prayers.
Many readers here are likely not aware aware of how different the presentation of religion in public conversation is in Canada by comparison with both the U.S. and the UK. However, the churches here do try and make their way in the body politic. I adverted to this in a long comment I submitted yesterday to TA but which has disappeared into the ether. Here is a link from that comment.
PS. FWIW, I can think of three evangelical groupings. “Render unto Ceasar” evangelicals. Two kingdoms Augustinianism. Trump is on the Ceasar not the God side of this equation (he likely has this view of himself). For this grouping, it’s “Trump a la carte” – depends on the issue. “Trump enthusiast” evangelicals. They can also be Trump a la carte. Left wing evangelicalism, a la CT and Wheaton, et al. Don’t like his language and morals. (They also are shocked at Democrats support for Graham Platner, with Nazi tattoo, 20 years of explicit sexting while married, physical bullying of women, phony… Read more »
Tim, I think it is important to be mindful of the alliance nature of the relationship between a certain cohort of American Evangelicals and conservative Roman Catholics. It is just that, an alliance based on mutual political self interest on some issues. Tensions are emergent, alliances fray. Allies become adversaries sometimes with astonishing turnaround. Note the the shift from “our heroic Bolshevik allies” of WWII newsreels to the ‘iron curtain’ coming down and the cold war that followed. And now currently very different dynamics which shines light on the notion of alliances, political, cultural, or otherwise
Thank you. Though used as a shorthand (“separation of church and state”) the idea is rooted in free exercise of religion; and government cannot establish a religion. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The Establishment Clause: This stops the government from creating an official state religion or excessively entangling itself with religious institutions. Its primary goal is to ensure that no citizen’s rights or civic duties are dictated by their religious beliefs.The Free Exercise Clause (Freedom of Religion): This protects the rights of individuals and groups to worship, hold spiritual… Read more »
Let’s be practical and take a practical case. Does religious duty over rule the law of the land? If carrying knives is forbidden by law, except when needed for work, can the law grant exemptions to particular religious groups? My view is not. [We might also consider employment laws, but that is another can of worms]. I don’t want to go too far down a particular rabbit hole, I am talking about principles. I heard a nurse from the 1970’s on LBC explain how nothing was allowed on the uniform, and wearing the uniform for any march meant instant dismissal.… Read more »
It is interesting to view this debate from Sweden, which I am currently visiting. For the last 100 years Swedish monarchs have refused to be crowned; to avoid the vast expense of the ceremony, to symbolise a modern constitutional democracy, and to avoid making the claim that the king derives his authority from God. I think Mark Clavier ‘s essay asks some pertinent questions here. Does the close historical association of church, monarch and state help or hinder our current attempts to enter the political debate? Are we now regarded with respect or suspicion because of those links? And how… Read more »
King of kings and Lord of lords, for ever. But for a little while longer, Lord of those who follow Him …
‘My kingdom is not of this world: if it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest’;
‘Thy kingdom come, on earth as it is in heaven’
‘Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established’
Dr John Wallace
20 days ago
Going back over 50 years ago, I became the youngest chair in England of a District Council. My Christian faith was well known and at that time I attended what would now be called a liberal Baptist Church. My ecumenical contribution was my Civic Service, held in that church where I rejoiced to see the leading RC priest (very Irish) sitting next to members of the Orange Lodge in their full regalia!. The service also involved clergy of different denominations. Sadly we don’t seem any furthwer forward!
An interesting aside. There was criticism by some of the ‘extravagant’ installation of the recent installation of the Archbishop of Canterbury in Canterbury Cathedral where there was the most substantial representation by ecumenical Christian and other faith leaders. By chance I found a video film of the enthronement (still called that) of Archbishop Donald Cohan in 1975 which seems to have been on a similar scale, but an even larger contingent of RC bishops alongside Orthodox brethren, moreover occupying places of honour in stalls in the quire.
Talking of ‘extravagant installations’, see this antique offering of the Confirmation of Election of Michael Ramsey in the crypt of St Paul’s, in contrast to the totally unnecessary extravaganzas of recent times.
My purpose in linking Archbishop Coggan’s 1975 enthronement service was to contradict the assumption of a new and excessive extravagance in this year’s Canterbury service, and to point out the considerable similarities.
I don’t think I have seen any Confirmations of Election. Are they usually filmed or televised now? Archbishops Fisher and Ramsey were the only people I could recognise in the 1961 film.
Archbishop Mullally’s confirmation of election was largely broadcast on BBC News. While they did npt show very much of the rest of the service that surrounds it, they did broadcast the legal confirmation ceremony. And pace the earlier comment it was to all intents and purposes very similar to the black and white Pathé News clip of Michael Ramsey’s. What has been added to those legalities is the service, placing the legalities in an act of Christian worship and prayer, together with the “Charge” to the new [arch]bishop, which I think largely addresses issues raised in the Statement of Needs… Read more »
And Archbishop Sarah Mullally’s confirmation of election can be viewed online at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMg73WjS93g — the legal confirmation ceremony starts about an hour into the recording at 1:06:25.
That should, of course, have read Archbishop Coggan. Even with careful proof reading these ‘machines’ have a mind of their own and substitute what they think (Coggan gets underlined in red).
Valerie Challis
20 days ago
Anon re Safeguarding – there is much information on both National and Diocesan websites, and on Government, about safer recruitment which includes but is not limited to DBS. Churches need to assess their own groups working with children or adults at risk – there is too much variation regarding frequency of work and amount of contact with vulnerable groups to make this an exact science, but the Gov DBS eligibility guidance is a useful place to start. But safeguarding is more than the paperwork surrounding the initial volunteering – it’s about the training, supervision, curiosity and alertness to the ongoing… Read more »
Tom Kitten raised a very good question wondering whether there is too much reliance on DBS checks . He also quoted a safeguarding social work colleague who said dangerous paedophiles avoid getting convictions It is very important to be clear what a DBS check can and can’t do, and even as a retired safeguarding professional I am beginning to wonder whether the proliferation of them has made the Church a safer place or whether it has multiplied the bureaucracy and created a false sense of security. It makes perfect sense that they are carried out as part of safer recruitment… Read more »
Quite. There is also the question of what is meant by ‘vulnerable’, and different agencies seem to have different understandings. ‘Spiritual abuse’ surely tends to come with a power imbalance, which implies a vulnerability on one side?
I think Smyth is far the most problematic even in this hypothetical question being asked now, getting on for half a century later. He wasn’t ordained: he was a very successful barrister, QC and recorder (part-time judge), seemingly a pillar of society and the establishment. Maybe, just, as a Lay Reader, if he was one, which isn’t certain. The issue has been consistently ducked and, so far as I am aware, no one has countered the assertion of the present Bishop of Winchester that there is no record of it. To my mind this is fundamental to the whole issue… Read more »
To clarify – my impression is that CoE safeguarding documents are many times the length of similar documents in other organisations. KISS seems to be a principle lost on CoE leadership.
It is very detrimental to improving safeguarding.
Nigel Goodwin
19 days ago
Isn’t the problem poor or naive politics? Much of politics seems, to me, to be about unintended consequences. Certainly that seems to be the problem with domestic politics.
What Christian principles can Christian leaders promote? Three come to mind.
Thanks. One thing to emphasise is how much these principles lead to differing political views. My dad, Geoffrey Goodwin, edited a book ‘ethics and nuclear deterrence’ which had a chapter by a series of Christian thinkers, incl. Bruce Kent. There was far from unanimity on the issue of deterrence. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/10.4324/9781003082910/ethics-nuclear-deterrence-geoffrey-goodwin The abstracts in the link above are worth readng. In his introduction, he says (careful with quotes and italics): “The essay is written in what, for want of a better term, I call a spirit of Christian realism….it affirms the relevance to political behaviour of a transcendental Christian ethic and… Read more »
Thanks Nigel, I agree with your father: we are on firmer ground discussing themes and principles, than devising specific policies bound by time and place. That said, we perhaps owe it to politicians to suggest possible policies, so that we are not just raising high-minded principles that can’t be achieved in practice. I’ve been reading the chapter ‘Democracy: Possibilities and Risks’ in Memory and Identity by John Paul 2. He discusses many of the points raised, though obviously better than I’ve managed. He notes the links between the American Declaration of Independence and the French Revolution with its ideals of… Read more »
“To posit the ideal, to highlight the relevant principles is a worthy Christian calling. To help identify, as is attempted in this essay, the political realities which are crucial to the attainment of even an approximation to the ideal and also the political processes through which the realisation of the principles must be sought is, I would claim, no less a Christian responsibility.”
Also this from Solicitudo Rei Socialis, which is related to what your father was describing – The Church does not have technical solutions to offer … For the Church does not propose economic or political systems or programs, nor does she show preference for one or the other, provided that human dignity is respected and promoted …But the Church is an ‘expert in humanity’ and this leads her necessarily to extend her reilgious mission to the various fields in which men and women expend their efforts in search of the always relative happiness which is possible in this world, in… Read more »
I was looking at my bookcase. You will be pleased to know I have one book by John Paul 2, three by Benedict and one by Francis, but so far no copies of ‘The Art of the Deal’.
The MAGA dog leash, MAGA camo baseball hat, MAGA kitchen upgrade set, ‘Trump was right about everything‘ hat and Trump crest pickleball paddle are great. But what exactly is a ‘golf ball ornament’?
Ruairidh
19 days ago
The role of the church in the body politic is a fascinating but complex issue. Social and historical contexts are important. For instance, Archbishop William Temple in The Church and the Social Order writes: ” The Church must announce Christian principles and point out where the existing social order at any time is in conflict with them” Temple’s current successor, Archbishop Mullally has been engaged public conversation around medically assisted death, and more recently the issues surrounding A.I. where she follows upon issues raised by the current Pope in his encyclical Magnifica Humanitas. The encyclical of course is intended for… Read more »
Anglican in Exile
15 days ago
The subject of Christians being politically invoked in politics what do we make of those who mainly follow the teachings and opinions of Paul rather than Jesus? I refer of course to the Paul who is alleged to have donated £28m to certain churches according to a recent Guardian report and drew the following statement from Operation Noah: “As the climate crisis intensifies, we’re increasingly concerned that a fellow Christian – one with more money and power than virtually any other Christian in the UK – continues to share problematic and highly influential views on the most important issue of… Read more »
If the CofE had clear social teaching, this would amount to an individual holding different views to the organization, which is inevitable and not problematic since it would remain clear what the church thought.
But on many important social issues, the CofE does not institutionally present clear, thoughtful views, crystallised at least at the level of general principles. And this lack of fully formed views, clearly expressed to the public, then causes problems when people with links to the church express views different from those the CofE quietly thinks are probably right.
Nigel Goodwin
15 days ago
I have been banging on about the issue of ‘vulnerable’ and what it means ever since I started posting on TA, but it seems that there are moves prompted by the charity commission. https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2026/12-june/news/uk/church-of-england-s-definition-of-safeguarding-could-be-broadened It is at least worthy of debate. Smyth is an outlier, but are we really saying Smyth was not a safeguarding issue because the adults he tortured were not vulnerable? For Christians, all people are vulnerable in their own way. Most people, in a situation of unbalanced power, are vulnerable at the point of bullying. The boundary between discipline and rigour, and bullying, depends on the… Read more »
Anon’s contribution is really important. Although loudly proclaimed by Evangelicals, every member ministry isn’t an idea I can find in the NT. But if all members are or should be ministers, this must surely mean every member DBS checks. But since CofE churches don’t have members, does this mean that all Electoral Roll applicants need to be checked, or all new worshippers? In today’s Gospel (Trinity 1), Jesus says ”I came not to call the righteous but sinners”. The importance of Safeguarding is obvious, but safeguarding procedures can appear to proclaim that our churches are only for the righteous. Perhaps… Read more »
1 Corinthians 12?
I don’t think that what we have in 1 Cor. 12 is ”every member ministry”. What Paul is talking about are different spiritual gifts given for the building up of the Christian community. Can these be described as ”ministries”? I’m a little surprised that you don’t refer to Ephesians 4. 11-13, where the basic message seems to be the same, but where there seem to be more distinct roles. But there doesn’t seem to be any suggestion at all that every member is expected to have one of these roles – or ministries. It is, after all, obvious amongst the… Read more »
Ephesians 4.11-12 says that he gave some to be apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers ‘for the perfecting of the saints for the work of ministry’ (or ‘service’). So I would agree with you that the author of Ephesians doesn’t expect all Christians to be either apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors or teachers, but he does expect them all to be perfected to the work of ministry. But perhaps you’re using ‘ministry’ in the sense of what we now think of as ministerial work (pastoral, liturgical, homiletical, sacramental etc.). I think those who argue for every member ministry are using it… Read more »
What Paul – or whoever – says is ”for the equipping (rather than ”perfecting”?) of the saints for the work of service (diakonia), for the building of the body of Christ”. I would agree that this can be thought of as ministry if the word is used in the wider sense, by which I think that we both mean the internal building up of the Christian body by the members of that body. However, I remember the time when ”every member ministry” was used in Evangelical circles to suggest that all Christians should be evangelists. I certainly cannot find that… Read more »
Bible hub gives several possible translations of ‘katartismon’ – ‘equipping’ is the most common today, but ‘perfecting’ is also listed. I don’t think all Christians are called to be evangelists, but I do think all Christians are called to be witnesses. Is this what you mean when you say ‘Yes, I do remember 1 Peter 3.15″? When I was a little boy the Sunday ‘work of the clergy’ in the C of E was to read the entire service—including Bible readings, intercessions, the lot—and to administer both bread and wine at Holy Communion. Nowadays we usually expect lay people to… Read more »
I think that ”perfecting” is best avoided as it can suggest ideas of ”Christian perfection”. The basic meaning of the verb -if one can speak of ”basic meanings” – is ”to fit out”, as one fits out a boat to make it ready to be launched. It is what James and John were doing to their nets in Mark 1.19. Christians are most certainly called to bear witness to our faith – called by Jesus himself ( Matt. 10.32-33). Martyrs are those who bear witness at the cost of their lives. But as you say, this isn’t the same as… Read more »
I would say that every spiritual gift entails a ministry. We are ‘a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation’, as Peter put it. Each of us has something to contribute, as Paul says, and we are expected to exercise the gifts we are given for the benefit of all. What I don’t see in the NT is the concept of a sacramental priesthood. Which is not to say it’s wrong, because the Church has developed in all sorts of ways since the earliest days, as was to be expected. But I do think it’s wrong to speak of… Read more »
The catechism in TEC’s prayer book says, “The ministers of the Church are lay persons, bishops, priests, and deacons.” Note that laypeople are listed first. The catechism then provides, “The ministry of lay persons is to represent Christ and his Church; to bear witness to him wherever they may be; and, according to the gifts given them, to carry on Christ’s work of reconciliation in the world; and to take their place in the life, worship, and governance of the Church.” (TEC BCP, p. 855) All Christians are called to ministry. Most Christians are not called to ordained ministry but… Read more »
Quite right. Paul includes ‘administration’ among the spiritual gifts, and that covers a multitude of kinds of service. I don’t think the lists of gifts and offices in Romans, Corinthians, and Ephesians were meant to be exhaustive: the Spirit is endlessly creative in gifting people to serve the church and community.
Indeed. The book “Are all Christians ministers? by the RC lay theologian John Collins is a salutary counterblast to much wooly theology around ministry. His discussion of the punctuation of Ephesians and the way that has changed over the decades is an important – and it would suggest convincing part of his argument even if he does get a bit polemical along the way.
The book was much in vogue with Anglican bishops 30 years ago and deserves to be dusted off and read again.
As does his earlier book on ‘diakonia’ in which he offers a major corrective to understanding ‘diakonos’ simply as servanthood, while also exposing the fragility of the slogan ‘every member ministry’. The latter, he says, flattens all ministry into the discipleship of the baptized. But he then undermines his case by appearing at times to come close to restricting ‘ministry’ in any meaningful sense to the ordained. That said, his books serve as a much needed counter to the easy rhetoric of ‘all member ministry’. In particular, they ought to be compulsory reading in those dioceses where the Chrism Eucharist… Read more »
Is there a case for 1 Peter 4:10 making this point in the New Testament?
Of course Christians should not (and cannot) withdraw from politics, but they should avoid making political arguments based solely on their own denominational doctrine and dogma. That leads to evangelical vs. traditional, Catholic vs. Anglican, or any other way of being Christian against the others.
Interesting piece by Snow and Gildea. Worth noting that from the start Christianity has acknowledged a separation between temporal and spiritual power (‘Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s’) and that Vance was in some ways defending the US constitution, which includes a separation of church and state and state. Also worth remembering that politicians stand for election, which few religious leaders bother to do, with the exception of pioneers like Jesse Jackson. Lastly, useful to reflect that politics is largely technical. It’s rarely good vs evil, but often the cumulative effect of decisions that… Read more »
J D Vance said the Pope should be careful when he talks theology. Obviously this is preposterous. Similarly his boss’s claim he was posing as a doctor when he was depicted as Jesus was offensive. So, too, when Trump was dressed as the Pope. How does this ensure separation of Church and State? Without the support of right- wing evangelicals, these absurd people couldn’t spread their divisive policies throughout the world. Trump once posed with a bible outside an Episcopal church. The bishop of Washington told him to stop using their building as a prop.
One job of the US government is to resist foreign potentates (good or bad) telling them what to do. It’s 250 years since they stopped us doing that, and I don’t know any Americans who view that as a mistake. I was surprised when I was in America how the separation works. I thought it would weaken the church but actually it makes it much stronger. Because it’s independent, the church is free to be itself. Conversely, the state is free to ignore the church. In the end, hopefully, the most rational approaches win out. We hold these truths to… Read more »
Obviously you are not keeping abreast of US politics. The White House is governed by a foul-mouthed autocrat who cares little for the rights of others. Many people who challenge him are subject to law suits and intimidation. Not least, our own BBC.
Yes, the powers invested in the US government are derived from the consent of the governed. So skilful politics involves a degree of charm, and broadening the consensus you have – that makes for a more cohesive society in which people are happier and it’s easier to get stuff done. Think Reagan. However, it remains the case that Trump has won two elections, each involving about 200 million Americans. The Pope has won one election involving about 800 people, of whom ten were from the USA. So Trump has roughly 40 million times more consent to govern America than does… Read more »
Your suggestion that the Pope wasn’t elected to run America is incredibly funny. It would obviously have been better if he had! Millions of Americans voted for an inveterate liar who claims President Biden was never elected; who has withdrawn support from Ukraine and threatened Greenland; supported genocide in Gaza and killed thousands through his war in Iran. His policies have made the quality of people’s lives more unaffordable while he has filled the pockets of his own family. The administration is the most corrupt in American history. You say Trump has 40 million times more consent to run America… Read more »
The 800 people you mention aren’t readily apparent. With the upper age limit the number of cardinals voting was 133.
Thank you Rowland. I did get the number of USA electors right at ten, which gives the factor of 40 million times more us citizens involved in trump’s successful elections.
I wondered whether RN was adding in a second tier involved in the election of a pope. Cardinal electors are in theory named by the pope, but in reality they are recommended to the pope after a process of discernment within the curia.
I think I see where you might be coming from: just the population of Vatican City? That seems to me to be an entirely fallacious argument in this context. ‘Catholic Herald’ states that Pope Leo leads 1.4 billion followers.
He was, however, elected by 49.8% of the popular vote. That sobering fact is the reason why, here in Canada, we can’t just assume that the problem will go away when he’s gone. A massive proportion of Americans thought it was a good idea to elect him.
I agree that members of his administration are equally toxic and may continue his appalling legacy when Trump has gone.
FrDavid, I don’t disagree with you on this; I just want to keep emphasising that it’s not just Trump and his family and his cronies who are the problem, it’s also the massive number of American voters who think his hateful agenda is just fine. Here in Canada we used to trust our neighbours to the south; I don’t expect that to come back in my lifetime.
But Trump’s approval rating in polls, even immediately after each of his elections, has never been higher than 40 percent.
In a very binary system, a proportion of voters are voting against whom they don’t want (Harris in 2024) rather than for whom they want.
The fact that 40% of Americans think its quite okay to have a president who refuses to stop talking about making our country the 51st state does not fill Canadian hearts with joy and trust in our neighbours, Pat.
i was in Houston during his first election, eating breakfast in a hotel which was being used as a polling station. I chatted to someone – he said he didn’t like trump, but disliked Clinton even more.
I fear the same thing happened with Harris.
Will it happen a third time?
I’m not sure whether I’m supposed to find that reassuring. I repeat, from a Canadian point of view, the fact that almost 50% of those who cast their ballots thought that the guy who regularly threatens to annex our country was preferable to the alternative is not a fact that encourages us to quickly return to our former trust in our southern neighbours.
The irony is that, although separation of church and state is in the US Constitution but not the Canadian Constitution, the separation is much sharper here in Canada, whereas in the USA, Trumpian evangelicalism seems to be the state religion right now. No Canadian prime ministerial candidate parades their religion to get votes; no American president could get elected without at least pretending to be religious.
I think this is one reason why the shorthand “separation of church and state” isn’t what the founding documents say. Government may not establish religion. Citizenry exercise the right to worship as they wish without government constraint. Trump doesn’t attend church; has been publically upbraided by Christianity Today and Franklin Graham both. American evangelicalism is not a monolith (speaking as an outsider) and it has a strong Stott-Keller wing concerned for social action alongside the older conversionist Billy Graham wing (I gather he was mildly concerned with his son’s tilt toward the former). The arminian and calvinist tension is always… Read more »
Tim, you remember the attempts of the Harper Government to intimidate churches and other charities who were too ‘political’ for the government’s liking?
https://www.ourwindsor.ca/opinion/columnists/stephen-harper-intimidates-charities-into-silence-goar/article_d24b7beb-2ae4-5600-8ee1-bbf01cb61772.html
i do indeed! I also remember Michael Peers saying that in 1998, in the aftermath of the crash of Swissair Flight 111, Christian clergy involved in the nondenominational memorial service were asked by the Chretien government not to mention Jesus in their prayers.
Many readers here are likely not aware aware of how different the presentation of religion in public conversation is in Canada by comparison with both the U.S. and the UK. However, the churches here do try and make their way in the body politic. I adverted to this in a long comment I submitted yesterday to TA but which has disappeared into the ether. Here is a link from that comment.
https://thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/ecumenical-social-action
The Swissair disaster was just awful. Many of the first responders suffered PTSD.
The long comment has now appeared…there really is a ghost in the machine…lol.
Speaking of alliances, I noticed from NCR that Pope Leo met with Bad Bunny in Madrid. Two cultural icons from the Americas. lol.
https://www.ncronline.org/vatican/trap-meets-transcendence-pope-leo-bad-bunny-meet-madrid
PS. FWIW, I can think of three evangelical groupings. “Render unto Ceasar” evangelicals. Two kingdoms Augustinianism. Trump is on the Ceasar not the God side of this equation (he likely has this view of himself). For this grouping, it’s “Trump a la carte” – depends on the issue. “Trump enthusiast” evangelicals. They can also be Trump a la carte. Left wing evangelicalism, a la CT and Wheaton, et al. Don’t like his language and morals. (They also are shocked at Democrats support for Graham Platner, with Nazi tattoo, 20 years of explicit sexting while married, physical bullying of women, phony… Read more »
Tim, I think it is important to be mindful of the alliance nature of the relationship between a certain cohort of American Evangelicals and conservative Roman Catholics. It is just that, an alliance based on mutual political self interest on some issues. Tensions are emergent, alliances fray. Allies become adversaries sometimes with astonishing turnaround. Note the the shift from “our heroic Bolshevik allies” of WWII newsreels to the ‘iron curtain’ coming down and the cold war that followed. And now currently very different dynamics which shines light on the notion of alliances, political, cultural, or otherwise
https://www.ncronline.org/opinion/catholic-voters-trumps-record-may-be-catching-him
Thank you. Though used as a shorthand (“separation of church and state”) the idea is rooted in free exercise of religion; and government cannot establish a religion. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The Establishment Clause: This stops the government from creating an official state religion or excessively entangling itself with religious institutions. Its primary goal is to ensure that no citizen’s rights or civic duties are dictated by their religious beliefs.The Free Exercise Clause (Freedom of Religion): This protects the rights of individuals and groups to worship, hold spiritual… Read more »
Let’s be practical and take a practical case. Does religious duty over rule the law of the land? If carrying knives is forbidden by law, except when needed for work, can the law grant exemptions to particular religious groups? My view is not. [We might also consider employment laws, but that is another can of worms]. I don’t want to go too far down a particular rabbit hole, I am talking about principles. I heard a nurse from the 1970’s on LBC explain how nothing was allowed on the uniform, and wearing the uniform for any march meant instant dismissal.… Read more »
I don’t know if there are equivalents for Christians, but this makes me uncomfortable
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/3/e019954.full
Some may argue dress codes are not the best topic for discussions on separation…..
My view is that hygiene and patient care are more important than diversity and religious practices.
I would not want to be treated by a nurse with a cross, of any size, dangling down his/her front.
But we are to fear God and honour the king, which isn’t total separation
It is interesting to view this debate from Sweden, which I am currently visiting. For the last 100 years Swedish monarchs have refused to be crowned; to avoid the vast expense of the ceremony, to symbolise a modern constitutional democracy, and to avoid making the claim that the king derives his authority from God. I think Mark Clavier ‘s essay asks some pertinent questions here. Does the close historical association of church, monarch and state help or hinder our current attempts to enter the political debate? Are we now regarded with respect or suspicion because of those links? And how… Read more »
Jesus is Lord of all, as later Caesar’s found out.
King of kings and Lord of lords, for ever. But for a little while longer, Lord of those who follow Him …
‘My kingdom is not of this world: if it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest’;
‘Thy kingdom come, on earth as it is in heaven’
‘Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established’
Going back over 50 years ago, I became the youngest chair in England of a District Council. My Christian faith was well known and at that time I attended what would now be called a liberal Baptist Church. My ecumenical contribution was my Civic Service, held in that church where I rejoiced to see the leading RC priest (very Irish) sitting next to members of the Orange Lodge in their full regalia!. The service also involved clergy of different denominations. Sadly we don’t seem any furthwer forward!
An interesting aside. There was criticism by some of the ‘extravagant’ installation of the recent installation of the Archbishop of Canterbury in Canterbury Cathedral where there was the most substantial representation by ecumenical Christian and other faith leaders. By chance I found a video film of the enthronement (still called that) of Archbishop Donald Cohan in 1975 which seems to have been on a similar scale, but an even larger contingent of RC bishops alongside Orthodox brethren, moreover occupying places of honour in stalls in the quire.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhS7c5rK_dE
I remember watching it at the time!!
Talking of ‘extravagant installations’, see this antique offering of the Confirmation of Election of Michael Ramsey in the crypt of St Paul’s, in contrast to the totally unnecessary extravaganzas of recent times.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGuViz1Orgs
My purpose in linking Archbishop Coggan’s 1975 enthronement service was to contradict the assumption of a new and excessive extravagance in this year’s Canterbury service, and to point out the considerable similarities.
I don’t think I have seen any Confirmations of Election. Are they usually filmed or televised now? Archbishops Fisher and Ramsey were the only people I could recognise in the 1961 film.
Archbishop Mullally’s confirmation of election was largely broadcast on BBC News. While they did npt show very much of the rest of the service that surrounds it, they did broadcast the legal confirmation ceremony. And pace the earlier comment it was to all intents and purposes very similar to the black and white Pathé News clip of Michael Ramsey’s. What has been added to those legalities is the service, placing the legalities in an act of Christian worship and prayer, together with the “Charge” to the new [arch]bishop, which I think largely addresses issues raised in the Statement of Needs… Read more »
And Archbishop Sarah Mullally’s confirmation of election can be viewed online at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMg73WjS93g — the legal confirmation ceremony starts about an hour into the recording at 1:06:25.
Sad to see Bishop Andrew Watson of Guildford there with the bishops of the Southern Province.
That should, of course, have read Archbishop Coggan. Even with careful proof reading these ‘machines’ have a mind of their own and substitute what they think (Coggan gets underlined in red).
Anon re Safeguarding – there is much information on both National and Diocesan websites, and on Government, about safer recruitment which includes but is not limited to DBS. Churches need to assess their own groups working with children or adults at risk – there is too much variation regarding frequency of work and amount of contact with vulnerable groups to make this an exact science, but the Gov DBS eligibility guidance is a useful place to start. But safeguarding is more than the paperwork surrounding the initial volunteering – it’s about the training, supervision, curiosity and alertness to the ongoing… Read more »
There is maybe too much information….
Tom Kitten raised a very good question wondering whether there is too much reliance on DBS checks . He also quoted a safeguarding social work colleague who said dangerous paedophiles avoid getting convictions It is very important to be clear what a DBS check can and can’t do, and even as a retired safeguarding professional I am beginning to wonder whether the proliferation of them has made the Church a safer place or whether it has multiplied the bureaucracy and created a false sense of security. It makes perfect sense that they are carried out as part of safer recruitment… Read more »
Quite. There is also the question of what is meant by ‘vulnerable’, and different agencies seem to have different understandings. ‘Spiritual abuse’ surely tends to come with a power imbalance, which implies a vulnerability on one side?
I think Smyth is far the most problematic even in this hypothetical question being asked now, getting on for half a century later. He wasn’t ordained: he was a very successful barrister, QC and recorder (part-time judge), seemingly a pillar of society and the establishment. Maybe, just, as a Lay Reader, if he was one, which isn’t certain. The issue has been consistently ducked and, so far as I am aware, no one has countered the assertion of the present Bishop of Winchester that there is no record of it. To my mind this is fundamental to the whole issue… Read more »
To clarify – my impression is that CoE safeguarding documents are many times the length of similar documents in other organisations. KISS seems to be a principle lost on CoE leadership.
It is very detrimental to improving safeguarding.
Isn’t the problem poor or naive politics? Much of politics seems, to me, to be about unintended consequences. Certainly that seems to be the problem with domestic politics.
What Christian principles can Christian leaders promote? Three come to mind.
A really good book is ‘Living Justice: Catholic Social Teaching in Action’ by Thomas Massaro, SJ. Nine key themes from the social encyclicals are –
Dignity of every person/human rights
Solidarity, common good, participation
Family life
Subsidiarity and the proper role of government
Property ownership: rights and responsibilities
Dignity of work
Colonialism and economic development
Peace and disarmament
Option for the poor and vulnerable
Thanks. One thing to emphasise is how much these principles lead to differing political views. My dad, Geoffrey Goodwin, edited a book ‘ethics and nuclear deterrence’ which had a chapter by a series of Christian thinkers, incl. Bruce Kent. There was far from unanimity on the issue of deterrence. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/10.4324/9781003082910/ethics-nuclear-deterrence-geoffrey-goodwin The abstracts in the link above are worth readng. In his introduction, he says (careful with quotes and italics): “The essay is written in what, for want of a better term, I call a spirit of Christian realism….it affirms the relevance to political behaviour of a transcendental Christian ethic and… Read more »
Thanks Nigel, I agree with your father: we are on firmer ground discussing themes and principles, than devising specific policies bound by time and place. That said, we perhaps owe it to politicians to suggest possible policies, so that we are not just raising high-minded principles that can’t be achieved in practice. I’ve been reading the chapter ‘Democracy: Possibilities and Risks’ in Memory and Identity by John Paul 2. He discusses many of the points raised, though obviously better than I’ve managed. He notes the links between the American Declaration of Independence and the French Revolution with its ideals of… Read more »
Thanks. He also wrote in his essay:
“To posit the ideal, to highlight the relevant principles is a worthy Christian calling. To help identify, as is attempted in this essay, the political realities which are crucial to the attainment of even an approximation to the ideal and also the political processes through which the realisation of the principles must be sought is, I would claim, no less a Christian responsibility.”
Also this from Solicitudo Rei Socialis, which is related to what your father was describing – The Church does not have technical solutions to offer … For the Church does not propose economic or political systems or programs, nor does she show preference for one or the other, provided that human dignity is respected and promoted …But the Church is an ‘expert in humanity’ and this leads her necessarily to extend her reilgious mission to the various fields in which men and women expend their efforts in search of the always relative happiness which is possible in this world, in… Read more »
J D Vance wouldn’t like that. Like the Pope, Catholics should stop talking theology
I was looking at my bookcase. You will be pleased to know I have one book by John Paul 2, three by Benedict and one by Francis, but so far no copies of ‘The Art of the Deal’.
You suprise me when you claim in the election between Biden and Trump, the Pope had the fewest votes..
Fake news! Can I draw you attention to this online store –
https://www.trumpstore.com/
The MAGA dog leash, MAGA camo baseball hat, MAGA kitchen upgrade set, ‘Trump was right about everything‘ hat and Trump crest pickleball paddle are great. But what exactly is a ‘golf ball ornament’?
The role of the church in the body politic is a fascinating but complex issue. Social and historical contexts are important. For instance, Archbishop William Temple in The Church and the Social Order writes: ” The Church must announce Christian principles and point out where the existing social order at any time is in conflict with them” Temple’s current successor, Archbishop Mullally has been engaged public conversation around medically assisted death, and more recently the issues surrounding A.I. where she follows upon issues raised by the current Pope in his encyclical Magnifica Humanitas. The encyclical of course is intended for… Read more »
The subject of Christians being politically invoked in politics what do we make of those who mainly follow the teachings and opinions of Paul rather than Jesus? I refer of course to the Paul who is alleged to have donated £28m to certain churches according to a recent Guardian report and drew the following statement from Operation Noah: “As the climate crisis intensifies, we’re increasingly concerned that a fellow Christian – one with more money and power than virtually any other Christian in the UK – continues to share problematic and highly influential views on the most important issue of… Read more »
If the CofE had clear social teaching, this would amount to an individual holding different views to the organization, which is inevitable and not problematic since it would remain clear what the church thought.
But on many important social issues, the CofE does not institutionally present clear, thoughtful views, crystallised at least at the level of general principles. And this lack of fully formed views, clearly expressed to the public, then causes problems when people with links to the church express views different from those the CofE quietly thinks are probably right.
I have been banging on about the issue of ‘vulnerable’ and what it means ever since I started posting on TA, but it seems that there are moves prompted by the charity commission. https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2026/12-june/news/uk/church-of-england-s-definition-of-safeguarding-could-be-broadened It is at least worthy of debate. Smyth is an outlier, but are we really saying Smyth was not a safeguarding issue because the adults he tortured were not vulnerable? For Christians, all people are vulnerable in their own way. Most people, in a situation of unbalanced power, are vulnerable at the point of bullying. The boundary between discipline and rigour, and bullying, depends on the… Read more »