Andrew Atherstone The Living Church Hope for the Communion? Reflections on the Anglican Consultative Council’s 2026 Meeting
Colin Coward Unadulterated Love Divine Violence and Abuse: Part Two of Ending Abusive Theologies
Phil Groves ViaMedia.News All Kinds of Minds
Helen King sharedconversations Learning to love and be loved: bishops, bodies and my Private Member’s Motion
Andrew Atherstone’s reflections on the ACC meeting in Ireland are very encouraging. His warm appreciation of Archbishop Sarah is especially interesting. At a time when there’s such focus on who said what and who is in which tribe her willingness to listen and be approachable is refreshing and wise. Let’s hope she is given the respect she deserves and that there’s an end to the tedious dissection of every statement she makes which seems to have become so common recently. An Archbishop who is faithful, human, prayerful and humble – a great gift to the C of E and the… Read more »
I don’t wish to comment on the ABC, but the reference by Dr Groves to ”the wonderful June Osborne” sounds strange to those who remember her as bishop of Llandaff. I don’t think that it’s too much to say that she is remembered there as having the pastoral sensitivity of a steamroller. But perhaps that is part of the wonderful diversity we should be celebrating.
Many thanks for Phil Groves’ engaging article. I sent around a link to a number of correspondents. Courtesy of Andrew Atherstone I was cheered to read about Archbishop Sarah Mullally’s insightful counsel to ACC-19, –perhaps an example of the ABC’s gifts as noted by Groves. Alas, as I read along in Atherstone, round about the section on the Standing Committee, I lost interest. I did have a kind of stream of consciousness vibe in the original sense as I looked over all the captions as a group. The vibe, who knows why, brought to mind Chris De Burgh’s tune, Spanish… Read more »
William Tyndale was very clear that his New Testament English translation was not to be read literally and referred to the !4 senses of scripture’ as a way of reading scripture well.
Yes, I was going to pick up on hat, and also ‘evangelical fundamentalist’ is looking at a subset of evangelicals, not normally found in CoE evangelicals.
i admire Colin for pushing at the boundaries, but I’m afraid having read these mistakes did not encourage me to read much further.
The reformers were Oxford and Cambridge educated. Speaking of which I now know what being ‘turned over to their devices’ means – it means people can participate in General Synod on Zoom!
Personally, I’m all for reading the Bible literally (subject to genre, eg ‘your eyes are doves’ is probably not a photographic description). However, I do not feel that I am necessarily compelled to accept as eternal truth all that which the Bible says, thereby relieving me of so mangling the text to make it internally coherent when it isn’t, or so re-interpreting it to fit (insofar as it’s possible) with, say, modern geology/cosmology that ultimately it dies the death of a thousand qualifications. Does anyone else remember Werner Keller’s reductio ad absurdum of the plagues of Egypt as a series… Read more »
Those of us on the Neurodiversity Working Group have had some backlash from Jeremy Clarkson, and now an oppion piece on ‘The Critic’ – Here is my response. https://viamedia.news/2026/07/10/be-kind/
“To me, Tettenborn’s article sounds like a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.” To me as well. I gave him a read via the embedded link you provide. Your reply is first class, and classy!. I mentioned that I sent a link to your article around to some of my correspondents. In the back and forth that followed, some of us reflected upon the neurodivergent people who helped influence us and form us. God speed with your advocacy within the C of E.
https://studentnews.manchester.ac.uk/2024/03/18/successful-people-with-neurodivergent-disabilities/
Thank you
Colin Coward notes, ” …a refusal to acknowledge or confront the extent of the problem facing honest believers when they open their Bibles.” An acquaintance of mine in the car business tells me, ” A Camry is really just a Corolla in a party dress”. lol. A lot of the conservative theology in The Communion, and in the church at large, is fundamentalism dressed up in an academic cap and gown. By contrast the history of critical scholarship is wrestling the scripture away from ecclesiastical ‘authorities’. Consider, for example, the history of modernism beginning with Catholic intellectual Alfred Loisy, and… Read more »
You live in a very odd time warp, I must say. Just attend any academic professional meeting — AAR/SBL — and you will immediately see how dated your assumptions are. Alfred Loisy! The man died in 1940. I am Senior Research Professor of Biblical Interpretation at the University of Toronto. I say this not for its own sake, but because professional academics is my entire life. I have trained more than 30 PhD students at Yale, St Andrews, and Toronto. When you make these kind of sweeping statements I just shake my head. As for Colin’s larger vision as articulated… Read more »
Thanks but this is largely a non-sequitur to my point– although read from a certain angle it kind of supports my observation. Your reference to professional seminars really does not help me much. Of course, Loisy’s scholarship is dated just as yours and that of your contemporaries both conservative and liberal will be eventually. From among several options I’ve attached a link on his legacy. It is his legacy, rather than his particular period scholarship, that interests me. There is no understanding Vatican II, for example, without him. He represents a turning point, much like Aquinas, in a different way,… Read more »
“Feel, vibe”
“By contrast the history of critical scholarship.”
Make up your mind, please.
Or, don’t and just have fun.
“Like things” and “have passion.”
I have served parishes at the local level far longer than you.
Go whacky and be a “Thinking Anglican” and create a liturgy for euthanasia for a ACC of –what is it — 15,000 people?
That seems almost priceless. You can preside.
Grace and peace.
You come across at times as somewhat disparaging of TA, and yet here you are. Your frustration seems palpable. Perhaps you are more of a ‘feeling’ Anglican than you realize?
Ref your final paragraph. I read a very wise essay once saying If you want to build a career in academia do a PhD. If you want to influence the world do a blog or website or YouTube.
My last YouTube offering on the early 19th century gay scholars got 750 views, which is pitiful by YouTube standards, but my local academic librarian said that is about 730 more than read the average PhD thesis, and 745 more than read an MA thesis.
I am pretty sure Colin gets way more views and supporters than that. More power to him
The use of the term “critical scholarship” — as if that nicely lined up with the view being espoused — was where my comment was directed.
As for Colin C’s views, I leave that to those interested in a replacement for Christianity based upon pyscho-sexual projections.
I have published a good many books and have a wide readership. But that isn’t an effort to dismiss what I regard as blog-level musing. That stuff can stand or fall in the land of blog-dom.
I have to say I’ve been privileged to know some very interesting academics, both clerical and lay from a variety of fields. Some of them have been very generous in sharing their time and their skill set with the community, and with their parish. I have a couple of friends at the Ph.D. level in the sciences. I have learned a lot from their patient conversation with me. But I think your observation is dead on. There is a real market place of ideas that has been opened up via new media. One guy I find really interesting ( though… Read more »
Thanks Ruaridh,
On re-reading my post I became aware that it could be seen as an attack on those many PhD qualified scholars here, and elsewhere, who contribute so much. That was not my intention. I have recently valued Dr Phil Groves essay on the Indaba process he posted recently, coming out of his PhD work on the early church
It was more a reaction to a sort of academic version of clericalism I perceived in AP’s post, and I wanted to assert the value of “lay” academics who use alternative channels and processes.
No, right on. Agree. I think your point about views compared to reads in terms of disemination of knowledge is interesting.I read a news story somewhere a few years ago that indicated academic pieces often cite articles that the author had not actually read in full.
Anglican Priest, I’m afraid you have completely lost me. Can you please explain to those of us who are not academic theologians, just a thinking person (infrequently) in the pew?
I can’t. You’ll have to consult those far wiser than me. ‘The wise.’ Loisy (d. 1940) Rod (still alive) and the creator of a New Religion (Colin).
I have nothing new to add to historical Christianity (though Anglicanism in the CofE may no longer qualify).
This isn’t academia v the pew. I serve the latter day in and out.
It has to do with what one purports to call “critical scholarship” as if this is some obvious chit to put on black or white at the bingo table.
I am not a simple person, but I do like writings to be clear. I do not want to speculate what an author means, when the author is very capable of communicating clearly. So, thank you, you have clarified that when you are talking about This isn’t a radical version of Christianity; it isn’t the genius of Girard; it is another religion altogether searching for a name. You have clarified that you are referring to Colin, and maybe to others also. Let me check my understanding of your views: Colin is the creator of a New Religion Loisy is not… Read more »
Loisy was who was he was in his era, and he is not a representative of “critical scholarship” as an actual contemporary reality.
Girard was a widely acclaimed philosopher who used mimetic theory to explain human desire. Converted to Catholicism after reading Dostoevsky. Died in 2015. Lectured at St Andrews when I taught there.
As for Colin’s views on why Jesus died, I’m afraid you’ll have to rely on his own comments.
Rod is alive and well.
“Loisy was who was he was in his era, and he is not a representative of “critical scholarship” as an actual contemporary reality.” No one said he was as far as I can see.
I think I can confirm Loisy is no longer with us, but whether he was ‘wise’ in AP’s opinion remains a mystery. AP stated: You’ll have to consult those far wiser than me. ‘The wise.’ Loisy (d. 1940) Rod (still alive) and the creator of a New Religion (Colin). which kind of implies AP considers Loisy as not wise, so he put ‘the wise’ in inverted commas, and grouped him with Colin, whom I am pretty sure AP does not consider as wise. Rod may, or may not, be considered wise by AP. Probably not, as he is n the… Read more »
Dostoevsky and Catholicism don’t relate for me. I converted to an evangelical Christian through Dostoevsky.
Alyosha, the Idiot and the Grand Inquisitor.
Surely the Grand Inquisitor is often interpreted as anti Roman Catholic?
Alfred Loisy was a man of his time. Historical/historicist reading of the Bible was gaining ground especially in German Protestant circles/universities. French Catholics were a different cultural reality. Vatican II would change the Catholic landscape (Brown and Fitzmeyer being representatives). Rene Girard was culturally French. (Later a member of l’Academie Francaise). Evangelical pockets exist in France, but the l’eglise reformee is a hybrid of modernist and “remember the St Bartholomew’s Day” conservatism). Another topic altogether would be the out-sized significance “The Grand Inquisitor” scene in the Brothers K would come to have. I suspect it puzzled Dostoevsky. (Yes, it is… Read more »
While perhaps not of great interest, consider this an extension of the point I made in my initial comment on Colin Coward. The thing that really changed the water on the beans for critical biblical scholarship in the Catholic Church (but see below) was the Encyclical of Pius XII, Divino Afflante Spiritu issued in 1943. Catholic scholars will tell you still it was a watershed moment. The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, for example, is dedicated to Pius XII and Paul VI of Vatican XII and the production of Dei Verbum by The Council a generation later. Notwithstanding, and this is… Read more »
2nd last para, last line, typo should read scream and run. lol.
See Robert Robinson, Roman Catholic Exegesis Since Divino Afflante Spiritu: Hermeneutical Implications (Dissertation Series / Society of Biblical Literature). Christopher Seitz, Convergences: Canon and Catholicity (BUP, 2019). Catholic biblical scholarship also included the third party at Vatican 2 (Congar, du Lubac, Ratzinger). Christophe Theobold has fine studies, as well as Norbert Lohfink, on the uneasy relationship between so-called higher criticism and the ressourcement movement. I evaluate Ratzinger’s appeal to “canonical interpretation” and compare it with the illuminating work of Paul Beauchamp, L’un et l’autre testament.
Robert Robinson!
Ah, would that it were, would that it were.
“I am Senior Research Professor of Biblical Interpretation at the University of Toronto”
No shit? You never told us that before.
I had to smile ( :
When one begins telling you what serious critical scholarship is about, it would be nice if they were an actual working professional.
I am quite confident there is a domain in which you feel totally up to speed (let’s call it kick-boxing). If I know that, I don’t breezily appeal to the “the world of kick-boxing truths.”
You would react as I did. “No shit.”
Or over react, as the case may be. ” … it would be nice if they were an actual working professional.” While I am now a retired parish priest, I am theologically trained and educated and am perfectly competent to offer an opinion on matters at hand. Besides, a historical survey of biblical scholarship as history is not rocket science. It is adequately covered in an undergraduate course. The history of the development of modernism and critical biblical scholarship, and how it has been received and is received in the churches is not an esoteric mystery that requires a Ph.D.… Read more »
You are surely not telling us that non-ordained people are allowed to preach and give sermons? Shock horror.
I know, eh! So both of the preachers I referred to, both women, are working with programs that serve people in the community. The sermons were delivered at our Cathedral here in conjunction with its community outreach ministry. I’ve been preparing and preaching sermons for years ( something I really enjoy) but I could not have preached those sermons! They incorporated a kind of life experience that I, as a life long cleric, simply do not have. I think there was something very New Testament, apostolic like in a sense, about their preaching. Re your other comment about who is… Read more »
Preach and give sermons? Is there a difference?
It’s good to see a rigorous academic on TA. I like Colin’s pieces, like Ruairidh, because he sees an urgency in doing something new for God. But I can’t see that extends to re-inventing God. With regard to violence in the bible, another post on TA claims that the bible’s message can’t be understood in a straightforward way, because it’s not a science book. It’s worth reading ‘The First Three Minutes’, a book by physicist Steve Weinberg: the violence just after the big bang is incredible. And so the bible includes violence because it reflects reality. On the other hand… Read more »
Interesting and concise comment. I wonder if previous debates in the C of E over doctrine and propitiating an angry God factor into all of this. ( see Link to TA 2007). Alas the embedded link to the Church Times piece referred to has expired.
https://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/2351-2/
The “violent abusive God” theme is baffling me…if there are things God can do, but people cannot because people are not God, maybe if a person does it it is violence and abuse, but God can do the same thing and it is not?
Like end a human beings life…God can, we cannot.
I wonder if I am following some form of “abusive theology” to believe that God is God and I am not?
To answer that question, you’d have to ask those who operative with these sorts of presuppositions. But I suspect they’d say, Yes.
God is a screen onto which we project what we hold to be deep truths granted to us via special knowledge.
Or, gnosticism. In this case, a particularly virulent case.
AP, forgive me, but I am really interested in learning from you. However, it becomes difficult to know when your statements reflect your own views, or whether they reflect the views of others with whom you disagree. It’s a bit like trying to unravel Nietzsche from his aphorisms. So, are you trying to say, in your second paragraph: ‘My view is that we use the term ‘God’ as a label for a screen onto which we project what we hold to be deep truths granted to us by ‘God” Can we describe how the single label is used to mean… Read more »
I probably confused things there, because the title of the article actually says “Abusive Theology”, and that is a concept I can accept as possible. I used the words “violent abusive God”. The article itself however, is directly comparing God with people in, to quote it “abusive relationships: a frightening combination of benevolence and chastisement, of love and anger, that confuses by its alternations, takes advantage of unequal power dynamics;”. It is anthropomorphism, which I do not think is the way to check on theology for abuse. I am especially bothered by “takes advantage of unequal power dynamics”, since surely… Read more »
A chapter of the book Colin has been working from is about the Smyth case. Smyth used violent biblical episodes to justify his behaviour, to his victims and perhaps himself – so one might argue that eliminating them would stop a repeat. But I’d guess Smyth himself would have turned out much the same way whatever, and the opportunity to stop him lay with encouraging his victims to ask more questions – to demand openness rather than secrecy, critical thinking and more socially engaged Christianity. That might have headed off other abuses too, which took different forms to Smyth. That… Read more »
I do not agree. If Smyth had never met evangelical God at Cambridge, and instead found a social environment in which he was able to acknowledge and openly express his homosexuality, he would have turned out a much less dangerous man.
Things might have been different if his religious outlook had been more aligned with his sexuality, but that’s a fractionally different question.
If violent stories were removed from the bible, my guess is that he would have been much the same. After the English abuse, he had time to think through his interpretation of those passages and to discuss them with the people investigating his activities, who presumably would have pointed out the flaws in it. But then he went to Zimbabwe and did the same stuff again – he knew it was wrong but did it anyway.
I don’t believe he knew it was wrong at all, though. What evidence have you that he did?
The Makin review provides a long chronology of the interactions between him and the rest of the Iwerne leadership, after his activities came to light. While they did not report it to anyone, they did discuss it amongst themselves and with him – initially exploring the idea that it was a sort of technical misuderstanding by him, with the disturbing possibility that he could still have had a future leading the camps. Plenty of people told him he’d got it wrong, and given his year off at theology college in Bristol, he had time to reflect and weigh their opinions.… Read more »
I am speaking of views held by others, not my own. The Nicene Creed tells us who is the God we worship and believe in. It was recited to this purpose. The run-up to its formulations entailed exegetical arguments from Scripture, first OT (Irenaeus; Justin; Polycarp, et al) and slowly a two-testament witness, hammered out in debate, preaching, apology, defense and so forth. Of course it is possible to reject this nexus of affirmation. It happened in the Arianism, e.g., fairly resolutely (High God and Son as created), but error sharpens truth. There are several very fine treatments of this,… Read more »
Nothing wrong with thinking that the judge of all the earth should do right and nothing wrong with being concerned or even frightened at some of the things that God seems to command. The Book of Numbers isn’t favourite reading for me. But reaction should not be hasty, I think
How have you established what is right and wrong? If you have identified what you regard as right and wrong without God being involved in that process, that is a human right, you can do that. I am at a loss for why anyone who believes they can and should do that would believe they needed the church, the Bible, or any participation in Christianity, but it can be done. If people do rely on God in some sense in order to establish what is right and what is wrong, therefore the “judge of all the earth” that you refer… Read more »
I have my reservations about ‘bibliolatry’ but also many reservations about Adrian-Thatcherism. It seems to me that it leaves us with a religious figure,Jesus, whose nature is certainly not determined by either devotional or critical reading of the records – or what appear to be the records – concerning him but ultimately and wholly by what we want him to be when we are moved to the utmost rejection of patriarchal violence. That seems to me to be very like an idol, constructed by an unbalanced reaction to a certain kind of crime. Revulsion by itself – highly justified revulsion… Read more »
The question is posed. Why do I participate in Anglican blogs like this — which in this case, with apologies, I think is not accurately named. No visitor to this blog would register that great or poor “Thinking” is going on. That fine. Names are names. TA is a place where lots of advocacy for LGBT etc is–is there any doubt–the main agenda. I think neutral arrivers would say, this is an LGBT+ etc agenda is the main agenda. So, why participate? In 2023 in the Anglican Church of Canada, there were around 1000 baptisms in the entire Province and… Read more »
Froghole was driven out by the Zionists.
He let the main thing be the main thing. And with great acuity and concern. Pretty much stayed away from the preoccupation with LGBT issues. The fate of the CofE and its future — here he was thorough and heart-felt
My first thought when I read your concise apologia pro vita sua here earlier today was a random one. I thought of the old cartoon series Quick Draw McGraw. The lead character Quick Draw’s catch phrase was, ” I’ll do the thin’in [thinking] around here, and don’t you forget it”. lol. You might review the About Thinking Anglicans descriptor.(link) https://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/65-2/ I think you may be confusing the operation of thinking with a kind of presentation circumscribed by the particular erudite conversation and skill set that defines your own comfort zone. My experience on this site, and that must be well… Read more »
I began a reply to Anglican Priest also linking the August 2003 introduction to TA which you have quoted, adding the observation that the general thrust of TA discussion has clearly changed in the intervening years. On reflection I decided to wait to see how others might respond to his views in his challenging ‘essay’ with which I largely empathise. Incidentally, for whatever reasons, some noms de plume seem to change more than once on TA, but anyone with modest forensic skills and a memory will know who you and Anglican Priest are! Froghole is, indeed, greatly missed. I would… Read more »
Thank you Rowland Waterbridge. I did not meet Stanley Monkhouse in person; but one day an email from him appeared in my inbox. He tracked me down. I had some great exchanges with him off line. He is missed here. Interestingly, Froghole gave a very appreciative, detailed, and moving report on Stanley’s funeral here at TA in Sept. 2023.( link) Just scroll down a bit. There are appreciative replies to Froghole from your good self, and a short one from me, Rod Gillis. One of my favorite comments of Stanley’s is on the subject of Maundy Thursday, my favorite date… Read more »
Stanley was also a distinguished musician, singer and organist (Fellow of the Royal College of Organists). There are short extracts of his singing on his ‘blog’ which his family generously maintain. His comments about music could be as challenging as his TA contributions. I recall that Froghole attended the memorial service in England (there was a second one in Dublin) and wrote a most poignant account. Stanley’s ashes were later scattered on an Irish mountain. Clearly the Irish years were important to him and, indeed, a bishop travelled from Ireland for the English memorial service. I wrote an obituary on… Read more »
Thank you for this!
If I may, God bless you, Mr Wateridge, at this season of your life. I have appreciated your commentary here, often in areas difficult to understand.
Christopher Seitz
Moses of The Communion?
I wouldn’t give that job to anyone.