A General Synod debate on the quantity of bishops and archdeacons is much easier to have than one on their quality. But despite the potential for episcopal red faces, possibly even purple ones, one is urgently needed.
It is easy to overstate the significance of bishops. They cannot deliver growth in parishes. That under God is down to front-line clergy working effectively with mission-motivated local congregations.
But it is also easy to understate the significance of bishops. A good one can do a tremendous amount of good. The Evangelical bishop of Chester from 1982 to 1996, Michael Baughen, was not always popular with those close to him theologically in his diocese and beyond, particularly in Reform. But the reality on the ground was that he did a good job in supporting front-line clergy, as did his suffragan bishops and archdeacons. He appointed some effective parish ministers and, though some of them may not admit it, he actually backed them courageously when the flak flew.
A good bishop can be very good for clergy morale. A bad one can send it through it the floor.
The uncomfortable questions that need to be asked about the quality of our current senior clergy are as follows:
• How many of them have a track record in leading small parish churches into growth or even very much experience at the parochial coalface?
• To what extent is an aptitude not to ruffle feathers seen as more important in preferment than an ability to breaks eggs in order to make omelettes for the sake of mission?
• What part does liberal-churchmanship networking play in senior appointments?
• If a liberal diocesan is inclined to want ‘diversity’ in his team and appoints Evangelical or Anglo-Catholic colleagues, to what extent is he inclined towards people who won’t rock the boat rather than towards those who will be most effective for the gospel?
These issues need urgently to be addressed if the growing net-giving churches in a position to plant new congregations are going to have confidence in their senior staff. Yes, theological factors are important in building such confidence – the net-giving churches are overwhelmingly orthodox and traditional in theology. They have a principled objection to theological liberalism.
But theology is not the only factor. Confidence will be lost if there is a sense that senior clergy are not there on merit; that they’re not actually up to the job; that they’re somebody’s crony.
For those of us who minister in net-receiving parishes, it is vitally important that our diocesan leadership has the confidence of the net-giving constituency. Ministry is tough out there - our mission for Christ in our parishes depends to an important extent on the orthodoxy, character and the ability of diocesan senior staff.
Tuesday, 30 June 2009
Sunday, 28 June 2009
WHAT WILL THE BRITISH STATE DO ABOUT THE BIBLE?
The legality of the Bible in English, at least in uncensored form, is now at its most precarious since the reign of Mary I (1553-1558).
Under the reign of her father, Henry VIII, the Bible had been both translated into English and distributed widely in the form of the Great Bible in parish churches throughout the realm. Mary reversed her father’s permissive policy towards the desire of the Protestant reformers to open up the Bible to the English nation, but the establishment of a Protestant monarchy under her successor Elizabeth meant there has never been a threat since to the wide availability of the Bible in English.
Until the cultural triumph of secularism in the second half of the 20th century.
The now deeply-entrenched public support for the sexual revolution, revealed by the 40th anniversary celebrations of the reaction to the infamous police raid on the Stonewall Inn in New York, will not be lost on the candidates standing for Parliament in the general election next year.
Particularly amongst younger voters, support for the suppression of views that are perceived to be ‘homophobic’ is likely to be de rigueur. This means that even under a Conservative government it is highly unlikely that there would be any serious political resistance against the pressure to use current anti-homophobia legislation to suppress any criticism of homosexual practice.
Under such cirumstances, it is difficult to foresee how elected politicians would be motivated to support the uncensored availability of biblical statements such as St Paul’s in Romans 1:
Under pressure from influential gay lobby groups such as Stonewall, with widespread media-fuelled public support behind them, the State will be faced with the question of what attitude it should take towards the wide availability of the Bible in the United Kingdom in the English language. Currently you can easily purchase an uncensored copy of the Bible from mainstream retail outlets and from online retailers such as Amazon.
Will the State allow a Stonewall-approved version of the Bible in retail outlets with certain offensive passages excised?
If this happens, Christians must pray for the courage to reject censored versions of the Bible promoted by the State out of loyalty to Christ. It is after all the Word of the King of kings and Lord of lords they are tampering with.
Under the reign of her father, Henry VIII, the Bible had been both translated into English and distributed widely in the form of the Great Bible in parish churches throughout the realm. Mary reversed her father’s permissive policy towards the desire of the Protestant reformers to open up the Bible to the English nation, but the establishment of a Protestant monarchy under her successor Elizabeth meant there has never been a threat since to the wide availability of the Bible in English.
Until the cultural triumph of secularism in the second half of the 20th century.
The now deeply-entrenched public support for the sexual revolution, revealed by the 40th anniversary celebrations of the reaction to the infamous police raid on the Stonewall Inn in New York, will not be lost on the candidates standing for Parliament in the general election next year.
Particularly amongst younger voters, support for the suppression of views that are perceived to be ‘homophobic’ is likely to be de rigueur. This means that even under a Conservative government it is highly unlikely that there would be any serious political resistance against the pressure to use current anti-homophobia legislation to suppress any criticism of homosexual practice.
Under such cirumstances, it is difficult to foresee how elected politicians would be motivated to support the uncensored availability of biblical statements such as St Paul’s in Romans 1:
For this cause (i.e. the fact that mankind rejected their Creator and turned to idolatry) God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet (Romans 1v26-27 – King James Version).
Under pressure from influential gay lobby groups such as Stonewall, with widespread media-fuelled public support behind them, the State will be faced with the question of what attitude it should take towards the wide availability of the Bible in the United Kingdom in the English language. Currently you can easily purchase an uncensored copy of the Bible from mainstream retail outlets and from online retailers such as Amazon.
Will the State allow a Stonewall-approved version of the Bible in retail outlets with certain offensive passages excised?
If this happens, Christians must pray for the courage to reject censored versions of the Bible promoted by the State out of loyalty to Christ. It is after all the Word of the King of kings and Lord of lords they are tampering with.
Saturday, 27 June 2009
COUNTERING THE ‘SMALL CHURCHES ARE BORING’ EXCUSE
An excuse Cranmer’s Curate has heard for Christians commuting away from the small local churches where they live is that we are ‘boring’.
This prompts cc to offer some reflections for his own ministry and hopefully for the benefit of any members of the youth group in a similar situation:
• We must resist the temptation to compete. That is likely to lead to discouragement and ineffectiveness in serving Christ in our contexts. The reason large gathered churches and their homogeneous church plants are attracting commuters is in fact not necessarily because the preaching is superior quality. What these churches can offer that we often can't is music in a contemporary form and that is undoubtedly a draw in the pop culture. As a friend of cc observed who visited a Conservative Evangelical church plant in our region, we are all post-charismatic now. And they can also offer peer group on a scale that we can't. These are facts of life - we just have to live with them, not get discouraged by them and get on with evangelism in the power of the Holy Spirit.
• We in the smaller churches need to operate on the ‘little and often’ principle in feeding our congregations with God's wonderful Word – sermons of no more than 20 minutes that are geared towards ministering God's Word in digestible form to people who have probably not had much biblical teaching. Their edification in Christ needs to be at the front of our minds, not what may impress our absent peers from the preaching conference.
• We should try to be creative with the limited resources that we have – interviews with members of the congregation, children involvement, introducing new musical items, teaching verses. Things that introduce variation into our services.
• We should hold our nerve in maintaining a mix of traditional hymns and the more modern choruses (provided in our settings they can be played on the organ and/or with the limited range of musical instruments at our disposal). Good traditional hymns really can reinforce the biblical message we are trying to introduce to a small congregation in a way that some of the repetitious modern choruses can’t.
Small churches are actually very exciting places to be; the living Christ is at work as his Word is proclaimed. We mustn’t allow ourselves to be bounced off the ball by the arrogance of the ‘you’re boring’ accusation but at the same time work hard to ensure that there is no justification for such a fundamentally consumerist rationalisation for driving past the door of a small church where God is at work.
This prompts cc to offer some reflections for his own ministry and hopefully for the benefit of any members of the youth group in a similar situation:
• We must resist the temptation to compete. That is likely to lead to discouragement and ineffectiveness in serving Christ in our contexts. The reason large gathered churches and their homogeneous church plants are attracting commuters is in fact not necessarily because the preaching is superior quality. What these churches can offer that we often can't is music in a contemporary form and that is undoubtedly a draw in the pop culture. As a friend of cc observed who visited a Conservative Evangelical church plant in our region, we are all post-charismatic now. And they can also offer peer group on a scale that we can't. These are facts of life - we just have to live with them, not get discouraged by them and get on with evangelism in the power of the Holy Spirit.
• We in the smaller churches need to operate on the ‘little and often’ principle in feeding our congregations with God's wonderful Word – sermons of no more than 20 minutes that are geared towards ministering God's Word in digestible form to people who have probably not had much biblical teaching. Their edification in Christ needs to be at the front of our minds, not what may impress our absent peers from the preaching conference.
• We should try to be creative with the limited resources that we have – interviews with members of the congregation, children involvement, introducing new musical items, teaching verses. Things that introduce variation into our services.
• We should hold our nerve in maintaining a mix of traditional hymns and the more modern choruses (provided in our settings they can be played on the organ and/or with the limited range of musical instruments at our disposal). Good traditional hymns really can reinforce the biblical message we are trying to introduce to a small congregation in a way that some of the repetitious modern choruses can’t.
Small churches are actually very exciting places to be; the living Christ is at work as his Word is proclaimed. We mustn’t allow ourselves to be bounced off the ball by the arrogance of the ‘you’re boring’ accusation but at the same time work hard to ensure that there is no justification for such a fundamentally consumerist rationalisation for driving past the door of a small church where God is at work.
Thursday, 25 June 2009
THE IDOLATRY OF A SOUND PREACHER
For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person - such a person is an idolater - has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God (Ephesians 5v5 NIV).
'Hi, cc, it's Bob - we met at the Reform conference. Great talk you did standing up for the Bible's teaching on homosexuality and liberalism. Very powerful.'
'Bob...Bob....Yes, how are you doing Bob? Surviving?'
'Well, I've just started in a parish a few miles away from you actually. Looking after five small rural churches. Good opportunity for the gospel actually.'
'Ah, is that St Rush-arounds-on-the-marsh? We have a few folk who come to us from that parish. It's been pretty liberal I gather.'
'Yes, it was. I was just wondering cc if you could spare someone from your staff team of 85 to come and preach occasionally and maybe one of your 33 apprentices could come and help once a month with the creche and Sunday Club my wife is trying to get underway? And it would be great if you could alert those who do commute to Megamile from this neck of woods that there is Evangelical ministry underway in their area. More hands on deck greatly appreciated.'
'Yeah, well, I've been there, Bill. My first incumbency was in a small South Yorkshire church before I took on that diocesan job and then came the call to Megamile....Um, the thing is, Ted, we've got a thriving student ministry here - very strategic - and our team's pretty committed with that. So can't spare anybody just now. You could try one of the retireds in the back of the diocesan directory....'
Wednesday, 24 June 2009
CofE NEEDS TO BE FLEXIBLE IN FACE OF NEW ORTHODOX FELLOWSHIP
This article by Cranmer's Curate appeared in last week's Church of England Newspaper:
A predictable result of the launch of the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans in the UK on July 6th in Westminster will be more irregular ordinations.
The Covenant for the Church of England, promoted by Anglican Mainstream in 2006, starkly made the case for them: ‘We can no longer be constrained by an over-centralised and increasingly ineffective control that is stifling the natural development of ministry. If the local Bishop unreasonably withholds authorisation, we will pay for, train and commission the ministers that are needed, and seek official Anglican recognition for them.’
Irregular ordinations have already been happening at the grass-roots and they raise urgent questions:
· How objective are those sponsoring such ordinations? Reform, for example, is to a significant extent a network based on friendships. A friend wants colleagues ordained for his thriving church planting network. The needs of ministry demand more hands on deck. An orthodox overseas bishop is duly parachuted in. But how rigorously have the candidates been checked? Is there not a danger that these friendship networks may be prone to be too hasty in the laying on of hands?
· What next for those who are ordained as assistant ministers in the church planting networks? If official Anglican recognition is not forthcoming, then what happens to those who have the gifts to lead an established parish church into growth? Will they ever be given the opportunity to use their God-given gifts in a turnaround parish church serving Christ in a local community?
These are very real concerns for a denomination that is facing grave numerical and financial challenges. At the risk of sounding presumptuous, the bishops would be well-advised to adopt a flexible approach rather than a strictly institutional response. What is achieved by putting excessive institutional obstacles in the way of the deployment of a potentially good incumbent for a parish just because he has an irregular ordination on his CV?
The undesirable secrecy surrounding such ordinations due to the fear of injunctions - a secrecy that gives the network leader undue control and prominence - is surely best countered by a generous institutional response.
A Conservative Evangelical flying bishop would undoubtedly help to build accountability and wider authorisation into these ineluctable grass-roots pressures towards irregular ordinations. An ideal candidate would be Reform trustee the Revd Jonathan Fletcher, who is already exercising a de factor episcopal ministry in this constituency. He is supportive of church planting but his public statements reveal a willingness to act as a restraining influence on its excesses; he is a passionate advocate for the socio-economic diversity of the Church of England and is a strong supporter of the smaller church; he is also trusted by the Evangelical Charismatic constituency, which gives him a broader base.
The House of Bishops is going to need to be creative and flexible in the teeth of the challenges posed by the launch of the FCA in the UK. There is no merit in defensive institutional responses.
Long-term, a vibrant stream of future ministers for a diversity of local churches could be cut off at source and a constituency with much to offer the wider Church could retreat into a sub-cultural ghetto.
A predictable result of the launch of the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans in the UK on July 6th in Westminster will be more irregular ordinations.
The Covenant for the Church of England, promoted by Anglican Mainstream in 2006, starkly made the case for them: ‘We can no longer be constrained by an over-centralised and increasingly ineffective control that is stifling the natural development of ministry. If the local Bishop unreasonably withholds authorisation, we will pay for, train and commission the ministers that are needed, and seek official Anglican recognition for them.’
Irregular ordinations have already been happening at the grass-roots and they raise urgent questions:
· How objective are those sponsoring such ordinations? Reform, for example, is to a significant extent a network based on friendships. A friend wants colleagues ordained for his thriving church planting network. The needs of ministry demand more hands on deck. An orthodox overseas bishop is duly parachuted in. But how rigorously have the candidates been checked? Is there not a danger that these friendship networks may be prone to be too hasty in the laying on of hands?
· What next for those who are ordained as assistant ministers in the church planting networks? If official Anglican recognition is not forthcoming, then what happens to those who have the gifts to lead an established parish church into growth? Will they ever be given the opportunity to use their God-given gifts in a turnaround parish church serving Christ in a local community?
These are very real concerns for a denomination that is facing grave numerical and financial challenges. At the risk of sounding presumptuous, the bishops would be well-advised to adopt a flexible approach rather than a strictly institutional response. What is achieved by putting excessive institutional obstacles in the way of the deployment of a potentially good incumbent for a parish just because he has an irregular ordination on his CV?
The undesirable secrecy surrounding such ordinations due to the fear of injunctions - a secrecy that gives the network leader undue control and prominence - is surely best countered by a generous institutional response.
A Conservative Evangelical flying bishop would undoubtedly help to build accountability and wider authorisation into these ineluctable grass-roots pressures towards irregular ordinations. An ideal candidate would be Reform trustee the Revd Jonathan Fletcher, who is already exercising a de factor episcopal ministry in this constituency. He is supportive of church planting but his public statements reveal a willingness to act as a restraining influence on its excesses; he is a passionate advocate for the socio-economic diversity of the Church of England and is a strong supporter of the smaller church; he is also trusted by the Evangelical Charismatic constituency, which gives him a broader base.
The House of Bishops is going to need to be creative and flexible in the teeth of the challenges posed by the launch of the FCA in the UK. There is no merit in defensive institutional responses.
Long-term, a vibrant stream of future ministers for a diversity of local churches could be cut off at source and a constituency with much to offer the wider Church could retreat into a sub-cultural ghetto.
Sunday, 21 June 2009
WHY BISHOPS DON'T SEE THE TRUE PICTURE
The reality of ministry in many Church of England parish churches is preaching to empty spaces. But the bishops don't tend to see it.
The reason for that is not hard to see. Bishops - diocesan, suffragan and assistant - tend to come to parish churches for special services. A deanery confirmation where there are candidates plus families plus supporters from several churches looks full. An induction of a vicar or priest-in-charge with their family plus supporters from their previous church plus community representatives again looks full.
So the bishop feels 'encouraged' as he hops round the churches.
But rent-a-crowd belies the reality of Sunday by Sunday ministry for many of us front-line parochial clergy. We minister regularly in buildings that are too large for the congregations that meet in them. A congregation of 15 meeting in a building designed to seat 150 is sadly not unusual.
In Sheffield diocese for example where Cranmer's Curate is privileged to minister as a parochial incumbent, 55 parishes out of the 106 that submitted their 2007 numbers have a usual Sunday attendance of fewer than 50 adults (there are 174 parishes in all). That means significant numbers of empty spaces in a significant proportion of the parish churches in South Yorkshire.
Clearly, the number of empty spaces will vary according to the size of the building. But most church buildings in the Church of England were built for the days of Christian Britain and were therefore designed to accommodate much larger congregations.
Propping up implacably liberal churches by rolling them into a team ministry or expecting the hard-pressed vicar of a slightly larger church to take their dwindling services or looking to the 'cluster' for a solution will not work.
The godly solution is to cut them loose and build up a base camp of viable churches that are in a position to plant new congregations. But a denomination committed to theological diversity has not got the stomach for such necessary retrenchment.
Evangelical Anglican churches that are seeing gospel growth must not allow their work for Christ to be sacrificed on the altar of liberal mediocrity and failure. Spurgeon's dictum applies here - learn to say no, it's more useful than learning Latin.
The reason for that is not hard to see. Bishops - diocesan, suffragan and assistant - tend to come to parish churches for special services. A deanery confirmation where there are candidates plus families plus supporters from several churches looks full. An induction of a vicar or priest-in-charge with their family plus supporters from their previous church plus community representatives again looks full.
So the bishop feels 'encouraged' as he hops round the churches.
But rent-a-crowd belies the reality of Sunday by Sunday ministry for many of us front-line parochial clergy. We minister regularly in buildings that are too large for the congregations that meet in them. A congregation of 15 meeting in a building designed to seat 150 is sadly not unusual.
In Sheffield diocese for example where Cranmer's Curate is privileged to minister as a parochial incumbent, 55 parishes out of the 106 that submitted their 2007 numbers have a usual Sunday attendance of fewer than 50 adults (there are 174 parishes in all). That means significant numbers of empty spaces in a significant proportion of the parish churches in South Yorkshire.
Clearly, the number of empty spaces will vary according to the size of the building. But most church buildings in the Church of England were built for the days of Christian Britain and were therefore designed to accommodate much larger congregations.
Propping up implacably liberal churches by rolling them into a team ministry or expecting the hard-pressed vicar of a slightly larger church to take their dwindling services or looking to the 'cluster' for a solution will not work.
The godly solution is to cut them loose and build up a base camp of viable churches that are in a position to plant new congregations. But a denomination committed to theological diversity has not got the stomach for such necessary retrenchment.
Evangelical Anglican churches that are seeing gospel growth must not allow their work for Christ to be sacrificed on the altar of liberal mediocrity and failure. Spurgeon's dictum applies here - learn to say no, it's more useful than learning Latin.
Saturday, 20 June 2009
THE PRICE OF IDOLATRY
And the king commanded Hilkiah the high priest and the priests of the second order and the keepers of the threshold to bring out of the temple of the Lord all the vessels made for Baal, for Asherah, and for all the host of heaven. He burned them outside Jerusalem in the fields of the Kidron and carried their ashes to Bethel. And he deposed the priests whom the kings of Judah had ordained to make offerings in the high places at the cities of Judah and round Jerusalem; those also who burned incense to Baal, to the sun and the moon and the constellations and all the host of heaven (2 Kings 23v4-5 - ESV).
“Cheers, Rev. Mine’s a Stella.......you're not the only one out of a job, mate. I had the main contract. I was the man.
The old man called me in. He said: ‘Cc, you’re hired. Merchandising, CDs, t-shirts, mugs, memorabilia. It's a massive tourist market. Five per cent commission for your good self and that includes franchising.....come on, cc. That’ll keep you in curries till the great god Vindaloo decides even he’s had enough. I'll maybe bung you a bonus depending on volumes.’
I said: ‘Your Royal Highness, you’re an officer and a gentleman. You’re on.’
How could such a sound man sire such a bigot? I mean, he’s even started having the Bible read in the Temple, would you believe?!
Of course, Rev, I couldn’t get there as much as I would’ve liked, what wiv me commercial commitments. But when I did go, it was sexy, inclusive, broad-minded. Now you’ve got religious hate speech against some of my former customers.
You know, Rev, I’m so fed up I’m thinking of emigrating....Why don't I?
Well, I s'pose I'm holding out for a change of regime...."
Thursday, 18 June 2009
RESOLUTION C ROUTE - PROBABLY NOT FOR SHEFFIELD
A PCC decision to pass Resolution C, allowing for oversight by a flying bishop who does not ordain women, has many advantages but Cranmer's Curate, for what it's worth, has decided not to push ahead with it.
Proponents of Resolution C may not find his reasons convincing but here they are:
* Local churches have the responsibility to ensure they adhere to biblical principles of male headship in the ministry of Word and Sacrament that they are prepared to accept. That applies whether or not there are legislative provisions for opponents of the ordination of women both to the presbyterate and the episcopate. Local parish churches cannot afford to get into a habit of excessive dependency on institutional molly-coddling. They need to be taught to stand on their own two feet - in humble dependence on God's grace in Christ.
* Dioceses do vary in the theological quality of their leadership and therefore for Reformed Evangelicals like cc there are close-call judgements to be made in relation to individual bishops. Your curate has come to the decision that Sheffield now has a diocesan who is both willing and gifted to work positively with front-line clergy in leading local parish churches into gospel growth. Dr Croft is in favour of the ordination of women - cc has a serious and principled disagreement with him on that - but the judgement cc has made is that that is less problematic that some of issues surrounding Anglo-Catholic Eucharistic theology and attitudes towards the Book of Common Prayer and some of the key Reformed 39 Articles.
* Your curate is unconvinced that the Resolution C route is the best way to get a Conservative Evangelical bishop, flying or otherwise. Your curate may be naive on this, but he believes that if the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans plays its cards right with the House of Bishops, then it could effectively lobby for the appointment of a bishop to look after our constituency. That seems to cc to depend on FCA-supporting churches being seen to use their financial and numerical muscle to support smaller parish churches with as few strings attached as possible, other than a requirement that they have orthodox Bible-teaching ministry.
A generosity of spirit by FCA churches, cc believes, could achieve a surprising institutional result, fuelled to a large extent by the desire to avoid the ructions raging across the Atlantic. But if the FCA is seen to be a special interest group for large gathered churches and their homogeneous church plants in affluent areas, then cc believes there will be a growing fissure between orthodox Anglican churches in the Church of England and those growing outside the institution. Such a fissure is not fertile ground for the appointment of a Conservative Evangelical bishop.
The youth group may well find cc's reasons unconvincing but he invites public discussion.
Proponents of Resolution C may not find his reasons convincing but here they are:
* Local churches have the responsibility to ensure they adhere to biblical principles of male headship in the ministry of Word and Sacrament that they are prepared to accept. That applies whether or not there are legislative provisions for opponents of the ordination of women both to the presbyterate and the episcopate. Local parish churches cannot afford to get into a habit of excessive dependency on institutional molly-coddling. They need to be taught to stand on their own two feet - in humble dependence on God's grace in Christ.
* Dioceses do vary in the theological quality of their leadership and therefore for Reformed Evangelicals like cc there are close-call judgements to be made in relation to individual bishops. Your curate has come to the decision that Sheffield now has a diocesan who is both willing and gifted to work positively with front-line clergy in leading local parish churches into gospel growth. Dr Croft is in favour of the ordination of women - cc has a serious and principled disagreement with him on that - but the judgement cc has made is that that is less problematic that some of issues surrounding Anglo-Catholic Eucharistic theology and attitudes towards the Book of Common Prayer and some of the key Reformed 39 Articles.
* Your curate is unconvinced that the Resolution C route is the best way to get a Conservative Evangelical bishop, flying or otherwise. Your curate may be naive on this, but he believes that if the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans plays its cards right with the House of Bishops, then it could effectively lobby for the appointment of a bishop to look after our constituency. That seems to cc to depend on FCA-supporting churches being seen to use their financial and numerical muscle to support smaller parish churches with as few strings attached as possible, other than a requirement that they have orthodox Bible-teaching ministry.
A generosity of spirit by FCA churches, cc believes, could achieve a surprising institutional result, fuelled to a large extent by the desire to avoid the ructions raging across the Atlantic. But if the FCA is seen to be a special interest group for large gathered churches and their homogeneous church plants in affluent areas, then cc believes there will be a growing fissure between orthodox Anglican churches in the Church of England and those growing outside the institution. Such a fissure is not fertile ground for the appointment of a Conservative Evangelical bishop.
The youth group may well find cc's reasons unconvincing but he invites public discussion.
Wednesday, 17 June 2009
BROADENING OUT INTO DEEP EVIL
In both courts of the temple of the Lord, he built altars to all the starry hosts. He sacrificed his own son in the fire, practised sorcery and divination, and consulted mediums and spiritists. He did much evil in the eyes of the Lord, provoking him to anger (2 Kings 21v5-6 - NIV).
"Sir, if you'd just like to speak into that green microphone over there, thank you....Good morning, this is BBC Radio Jerusalem. That was I still haven't found what I'm looking for by U2. Remember that one, Sir?"
"Not really, it came out before I was born."
"So Sir, quite a change of religious policy from your father."
"Well, Dad was a decent dude in many ways, but a bit narrow really. The palace used to be crawling with all these prophets. I'm wanting to broaden things out and make Jerusalem into an international centre for human spirituality. This is a multi-faith world we're living in. You've gotta get up with it. So we're wanting to offer people choice. That's why I've divided the temple up into various zones to cater for a diversity of spiritualities. You want it, you got it."
Manasseh son of Hezekiah reigned in Jerusalem for 55 years.
Tuesday, 16 June 2009
WHY NO TRUE ANGLICAN COULD TAKE PART IN A U2CHARIST
Singing U2's 'I still haven't found what I'm looking for' instead of Rock of Ages at Holy Communion may seem a good strategy for reaching youth but it is in fact a poisoned spiritual chalice.
So-called 'U2charists', pioneered by St Swithin's church in Lincoln, are, according to Jonathan Wynne-Jones in The Sunday Telegraph, among the alternative services explored in a book produced by the Archbishop of Canterbury's Fresh Expressions of Church initiative.
The Irish rock band's 1987 hit 'I still haven't found what I'm looking for' is one of the songs that features in these services.
It appears to affirm the value of Christ's achievment on the Cross:
But then immediately detracts from it with typical post-modern uncertainty posing as epistemological humility:
The contrast with the biblical doctrine of the Book of Common Prayer could not be starker. Its Prayer of Consecration celebrates the 'full, perfect and sufficient sacrifice, oblation and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world' which the Lord Jesus Christ made once and for all upon the Cross.
Yes, it is true that we await the consummation of Christ's Kingdom at His second coming, but that does not detract from the sufficiency of His achievement on the Cross in propitiating God's righteous anger and indignation against us and thus in reconciling us to God.
There is no post-modern uncertainty in Christ's statement as recorded in John 6v35: 'I am the bread of life; he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst' (RSV).
So-called 'U2charists', pioneered by St Swithin's church in Lincoln, are, according to Jonathan Wynne-Jones in The Sunday Telegraph, among the alternative services explored in a book produced by the Archbishop of Canterbury's Fresh Expressions of Church initiative.
The Irish rock band's 1987 hit 'I still haven't found what I'm looking for' is one of the songs that features in these services.
It appears to affirm the value of Christ's achievment on the Cross:
You broke the bonds
And you loosened the chains
Carried the cross
Of all my shame
all my shame
You know I believe it
But then immediately detracts from it with typical post-modern uncertainty posing as epistemological humility:
But I still haven't found what I'm looking for (repeated twice)
The contrast with the biblical doctrine of the Book of Common Prayer could not be starker. Its Prayer of Consecration celebrates the 'full, perfect and sufficient sacrifice, oblation and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world' which the Lord Jesus Christ made once and for all upon the Cross.
Yes, it is true that we await the consummation of Christ's Kingdom at His second coming, but that does not detract from the sufficiency of His achievement on the Cross in propitiating God's righteous anger and indignation against us and thus in reconciling us to God.
There is no post-modern uncertainty in Christ's statement as recorded in John 6v35: 'I am the bread of life; he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst' (RSV).
Sunday, 14 June 2009
NO ARTICLE 26 LOOPHOLE FOR FALSE TEACHERS
For our orthodox Anglican friends in the United States, the question of Article 26 and the acceptability of ministry from false teachers is far from academic. The comments over on the US-based global Anglican news service VirtueOnline underneath the piece about Gene Robinson and Article 26 (see As Eye See It) really do come from the front-line of the battle.
As has been helpfully pointed out in one of the comments, the pastoral purpose of Article 26 is to reassure those who in good faith accepted the sacramental ministry of those they did not know were dodgy ministers (or in the case of infant baptism had the ministry accepted by their parents). They do not need to be rebaptised or, in relation to Holy Communion, reconfirmed because Christ’s ordinance is not nullified by the wickedness of the minister.
But the crucial last sentence of Article 26 (ignored by proponents of the apparent loophole for the likes of Mr Robinson) makes clear that it is not meant to condone the ministry of false teachers in Christ's Church. They should be deposed after due process. If they are not, then there is something corrupt about the Church that continues to license them.
Tragically, that’s TEC in a nutshell.
Nor can we afford to be complacent about this in the Church of England.
As has been helpfully pointed out in one of the comments, the pastoral purpose of Article 26 is to reassure those who in good faith accepted the sacramental ministry of those they did not know were dodgy ministers (or in the case of infant baptism had the ministry accepted by their parents). They do not need to be rebaptised or, in relation to Holy Communion, reconfirmed because Christ’s ordinance is not nullified by the wickedness of the minister.
But the crucial last sentence of Article 26 (ignored by proponents of the apparent loophole for the likes of Mr Robinson) makes clear that it is not meant to condone the ministry of false teachers in Christ's Church. They should be deposed after due process. If they are not, then there is something corrupt about the Church that continues to license them.
Tragically, that’s TEC in a nutshell.
Nor can we afford to be complacent about this in the Church of England.
Thursday, 11 June 2009
WHY CHURCH DOCTRINE RULES OUT HOLY COMMUNION FROM GENE ROBINSON
Would you take Holy Communion from Gene Robinson?
A selective reading of Article 26 of the Church of England's 39 Articles of Religion suggests a faithful Anglican could. Indeed, Article 26 has been invoked to justify Holy Communion from Gene Robinson on a Fulcrum thread following an article by the Revd Tim Goodbody, which originally appeared on Cranmer's Curate - 'Why I am still an Anglican'.
'Of the Unworthiness of the Ministers, which hinders not the effect of the Sacrament' states:
So a faithful Anglican whose mind and heart is rightly focussed on the 'full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world' which our Lord Jesus made on the Cross could take Holy Communion from Gene Robinson.
After all, the effect of Christ's ordinance is not taken away by the wickedness of the presiding minister.
However, it is the crucial last sentence in Article 26 that rules out the Anglican legitimacy of taking Holy Communion from Mr Robinson or indeed being present when he presumes to minister the Word of God:
It is the failure of his colleagues in the Episcopal Church of the United States to depose him from his bishopric in New Hampshire, as Article 26 explictly states should happen in the case of an evil minister, that makes it a matter of due canonical obedience for faithful Anglicans to refuse to accept the ministry of Mr Robinson.
A selective reading of Article 26 of the Church of England's 39 Articles of Religion suggests a faithful Anglican could. Indeed, Article 26 has been invoked to justify Holy Communion from Gene Robinson on a Fulcrum thread following an article by the Revd Tim Goodbody, which originally appeared on Cranmer's Curate - 'Why I am still an Anglican'.
'Of the Unworthiness of the Ministers, which hinders not the effect of the Sacrament' states:
Although in the visible Church the evil be ever mingled with good, and sometimes the evil have chief authority in the Ministration of Word and Sacraments, yet forasmuch as they do not the same in their own name, but in Christ's, and do minister by his commission and authority, we may use their Ministry, both in hearing the Word of God, and in receiving of the Sacraments. Neither is the effect of Christ's ordinance taken away by their wickedness, nor the grace of God's gifts diminished from such as by faith and rightly do receive the Sacraments ministered unto them; which be effectual, because of Christ's institution and promise, although they be ministered by evil men.
So a faithful Anglican whose mind and heart is rightly focussed on the 'full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world' which our Lord Jesus made on the Cross could take Holy Communion from Gene Robinson.
After all, the effect of Christ's ordinance is not taken away by the wickedness of the presiding minister.
However, it is the crucial last sentence in Article 26 that rules out the Anglican legitimacy of taking Holy Communion from Mr Robinson or indeed being present when he presumes to minister the Word of God:
Nevertheless, it appertaineth to the discipline of the Church, that inquiry be made of evil Ministers, and that they be accused by those that have knowledge of their offences; and finally being found guilty, by just judgement be deposed.
It is the failure of his colleagues in the Episcopal Church of the United States to depose him from his bishopric in New Hampshire, as Article 26 explictly states should happen in the case of an evil minister, that makes it a matter of due canonical obedience for faithful Anglicans to refuse to accept the ministry of Mr Robinson.
Tuesday, 9 June 2009
WORD OF GOD BRINGS LIFE IN THE DEATH-THROES OF A NATION
“So Elisha died, and they buried him. Now bands of Moabites used to invade the land in the spring of the year. And as a man was being buried, behold, a marauding band was seen and the man was thrown into the grave of Elisha, and as soon as the man touched the bones of Elisha, he revived and stood on his feet” (2 Kings 13v20-21 – ESV).
So read your curate this morning as he works his way through Robert Murray McCheyne’s Bible reading plan.
It is a most remarkable passage of Scripture.
Israel in the 9th century BC is in an appalling spiritual, moral, political and military crisis. The nation is in fact in its death-throes. Because of Israel's infidelity to the living God, it is soon to be destroyed by the invading Assyrians.
So, the curse of death hangs over the nation like a vulture as the man appointed to proclaim the Word of God to His covenant people – the prophet Elisha – himself dies and is buried.
So dire is the national crisis that a man can’t even get a decent burial because of marauding bands of pagans spoiling the joy of spring for the people of God. Spring is not in the air - death is. The undertakers chuck his body into the nearest available tomb – Elisha’s – so they can make a quick getaway in the hearse.
'Fags out, lads - there are Moabites in that transit van.'
But as soon as the man’s body comes into contact with the prophet’s bones he immediately revives and stands on his feet.
What a wonderful picture of the power of the Word of God to bring life in the midst of death.
Sunday, 7 June 2009
WHY I AM NOT ASHAMED TO BE A PROTESTANT
A t-shirt with the above sentiment is unlikely to appear at the launch of the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans in the UK on July 6th. Not on the platform at any rate.
There is no doubt wisdom in trying to keep the GAFCON-inspired movement a broad coalition in the cause of credal orthodoxy in the Anglican Communion. The speakers at the Westminster Central Hall event - ‘Be Faithful: Confessing Anglicans in Global & Local Mission’ - encompass Charismatics, Conservative Evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics.
But the FCA launch seems a propitious moment to celebrate the enormous historical contribution Protestantism as a movement has made to the cause of Christ’s Gospel in the United Kingdom and indeed throughout the world:
· Protestantism brought the Bible to the British people in a language they could understand. It is not its fault that some people chose to interpret the Bible irresponsibly and to use isolated biblical texts as a pretext for launching their own sects.
· Protestantism took power away from the clerical caste and diffused it. It’s not its fault that some people abused the intellectual freedom Protestantism gave them and went liberal.
· Protestantism was socially adventurous. It brought the Gospel to all sections of society in Britain and took it beyond the British Isles overseas. It’s not its fault that the Victorian public schools gave rise to socially exclusive forms of Evangelicalism.
So Cranmer’s Curate is not ashamed of the P word. In fact, the launch of the FCA seems a good time to remind himself just what a badge of honour it is.
There is no doubt wisdom in trying to keep the GAFCON-inspired movement a broad coalition in the cause of credal orthodoxy in the Anglican Communion. The speakers at the Westminster Central Hall event - ‘Be Faithful: Confessing Anglicans in Global & Local Mission’ - encompass Charismatics, Conservative Evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics.
But the FCA launch seems a propitious moment to celebrate the enormous historical contribution Protestantism as a movement has made to the cause of Christ’s Gospel in the United Kingdom and indeed throughout the world:
· Protestantism brought the Bible to the British people in a language they could understand. It is not its fault that some people chose to interpret the Bible irresponsibly and to use isolated biblical texts as a pretext for launching their own sects.
· Protestantism took power away from the clerical caste and diffused it. It’s not its fault that some people abused the intellectual freedom Protestantism gave them and went liberal.
· Protestantism was socially adventurous. It brought the Gospel to all sections of society in Britain and took it beyond the British Isles overseas. It’s not its fault that the Victorian public schools gave rise to socially exclusive forms of Evangelicalism.
So Cranmer’s Curate is not ashamed of the P word. In fact, the launch of the FCA seems a good time to remind himself just what a badge of honour it is.
Thursday, 4 June 2009
CROSS COVERED UP IN CHURCH HALL POLLING STATION
If you choose to hold an election in a church hall, you might expect to see a fig-leaf on the wall but probably not one covering up the Cross of Christ.
Our church hall here in Sheffield has been used as a polling station for the European elections today. Cranmer’s Curate was somewhat bemused to find that a picture on the Sunday Club notice board displaying three crosses had been covered up.
Cranmer's Curate rang the electoral services department of Sheffield City Council for an official explanation. A gentleman said there had been no general policy issued by electoral services on covering up religious symbols in polling stations but because there was a Christian Party in the election he could understand why the presiding officer might have felt it necessary to cover up our crosses.
The presiding officer might have been worried that he could be accused of bias if he had left the crosses exposed so near the polling booths.
Cranmer's Curate's parting shot to the gentleman at electoral services was: ‘No Christianity, no democracy.’ He said it with a smile on his face and friendliness in his voice but meant it seriously.
European democracy developed in the cultural and philosophical soil enriched by Christianity – other philosophical influences including Enlightenment-influenced humanism of course helped its growth in the 19th and 20th centuries, but Christianity must take a large share of the credit for the way in which universal-suffrage democracy has developed in Christian countries.
The democratic revolution in 1989 in Eastern Europe would not have occurred in the way that it did without the significant involvement of Christians in the protest movements.
It is possible that someone might be swayed to vote for the Christian Party by the sight of three crosses on a Sunday Club notice board. But surely highly unlikely.
It would be cliche'd and fruitless to speculate about what would happen to the religious symbols in an Islamic, Hindu or Sikh community centre if such were used as a polling station because there is no specific political party representing these religions in the election.
But Cranmer's Curate would certainly conclude that it is a very sad reflection on the state of our democracy that a presiding officer considered it necessary to capitulate to the complaints' culture by covering up the symbol of mankind’s redemption by God’s Incarnate Son Jesus Christ at an election in a church hall.
Our church hall here in Sheffield has been used as a polling station for the European elections today. Cranmer’s Curate was somewhat bemused to find that a picture on the Sunday Club notice board displaying three crosses had been covered up.
Cranmer's Curate rang the electoral services department of Sheffield City Council for an official explanation. A gentleman said there had been no general policy issued by electoral services on covering up religious symbols in polling stations but because there was a Christian Party in the election he could understand why the presiding officer might have felt it necessary to cover up our crosses.
The presiding officer might have been worried that he could be accused of bias if he had left the crosses exposed so near the polling booths.
Cranmer's Curate's parting shot to the gentleman at electoral services was: ‘No Christianity, no democracy.’ He said it with a smile on his face and friendliness in his voice but meant it seriously.
European democracy developed in the cultural and philosophical soil enriched by Christianity – other philosophical influences including Enlightenment-influenced humanism of course helped its growth in the 19th and 20th centuries, but Christianity must take a large share of the credit for the way in which universal-suffrage democracy has developed in Christian countries.
The democratic revolution in 1989 in Eastern Europe would not have occurred in the way that it did without the significant involvement of Christians in the protest movements.
It is possible that someone might be swayed to vote for the Christian Party by the sight of three crosses on a Sunday Club notice board. But surely highly unlikely.
It would be cliche'd and fruitless to speculate about what would happen to the religious symbols in an Islamic, Hindu or Sikh community centre if such were used as a polling station because there is no specific political party representing these religions in the election.
But Cranmer's Curate would certainly conclude that it is a very sad reflection on the state of our democracy that a presiding officer considered it necessary to capitulate to the complaints' culture by covering up the symbol of mankind’s redemption by God’s Incarnate Son Jesus Christ at an election in a church hall.
Wednesday, 3 June 2009
GOD CREATED TESTOSTERONE - GET OVER IT
God created maleness and therefore it is good.
Unfortunately, that very basic theological point seems to have been lost on the inspectors from the Ministry Division of the Archbishops' Council who recently published their report on the Conservative Evangelical theological college Oak Hill.
Their report contains valid insights that the college would be very well-advised to take on board. Oak Hill ordinands do need to do placements in non-evangelical churches. The Church of the nation will not be renewed unless Gospel-preaching, Bible-teaching Evangelicals are prepared to move out of the big church comfort zone and go into turnaround situations as incumbents.
But one section of the report, as quoted on p5 of the May 29th edition of the the Church Times, seems to display a problem with what God in His wisdom has called into being:
‘We felt concern at the general sense of drivenness...... something we see arising, to some extent at least, out of the College’s underpinning ethos, as well as out of a palpable sense of competitiveness within a highly able and young male community. We found the College to be pervaded by an air of hyper-activity,’ intoned the inspectors.
Cranmer’s Curate is inclined to thank the good Lord that these young men are driven. That’s much better than their being postmodernly ‘whatever’ in their outlook.
The concept of ‘chilling out with God’ may be trendy at some diocesan retreat centres, but that attitude is not going to renew the Church of England.
Clearly, pride-driven, dog-eat-dog competiveness is a fruit of the sinful nature and women are prone to it as well as men, but a desire to be the best that these young men can be for Christ in their theological training is to be thoroughly commended.
Almighty God, their heavenly Father, created testosterone and His incarnate Son had it in Him – so get over it.
Unfortunately, that very basic theological point seems to have been lost on the inspectors from the Ministry Division of the Archbishops' Council who recently published their report on the Conservative Evangelical theological college Oak Hill.
Their report contains valid insights that the college would be very well-advised to take on board. Oak Hill ordinands do need to do placements in non-evangelical churches. The Church of the nation will not be renewed unless Gospel-preaching, Bible-teaching Evangelicals are prepared to move out of the big church comfort zone and go into turnaround situations as incumbents.
But one section of the report, as quoted on p5 of the May 29th edition of the the Church Times, seems to display a problem with what God in His wisdom has called into being:
‘We felt concern at the general sense of drivenness...... something we see arising, to some extent at least, out of the College’s underpinning ethos, as well as out of a palpable sense of competitiveness within a highly able and young male community. We found the College to be pervaded by an air of hyper-activity,’ intoned the inspectors.
Cranmer’s Curate is inclined to thank the good Lord that these young men are driven. That’s much better than their being postmodernly ‘whatever’ in their outlook.
The concept of ‘chilling out with God’ may be trendy at some diocesan retreat centres, but that attitude is not going to renew the Church of England.
Clearly, pride-driven, dog-eat-dog competiveness is a fruit of the sinful nature and women are prone to it as well as men, but a desire to be the best that these young men can be for Christ in their theological training is to be thoroughly commended.
Almighty God, their heavenly Father, created testosterone and His incarnate Son had it in Him – so get over it.
Tuesday, 2 June 2009
WHY EVANGELICAL ORDINANDS HAVE NOT FOUND CURACIES
Over on the Fulcrum Forum (under the slightly silly thread title: No Jobs for Hard-line Fundamentalists), the Bishop of Willesden, the Rt Revd Peter Broadbent, has shed invaluable light on the reasons why around a dozen Evangelical ordinands have not found curacies. Here is his explanation (originally posted on Ship of Fools):
Honest comment.
Cranmer's Curate would make a couple of observations:
* An Evangelical not wanting to wear a stole is understandable (it is not a Prayer Book vestment). But cassock, surplice and preaching scarf seem reasonable and any Evangelical who refuses to wear those is being unconscionably petty and not serving the Gospel, it seems to cc.
* There are supposed to be two integrities in the Church of England on the ordination of women to the presbyterate, as John Richardson has pointed out. The conviction of those who hold to male headship in the local church ought to be at the very least respected. Your curate happens to believe that wanting to train under a male incumbent is the right biblical approach.
The last word on this (for the time being) comes from a brilliant article by the Archdeacon of Chester, Donald Allister, in the 2008 Oak Hill Yearbook. In 'Whom Shall I Send?' he encouraged Evangelical clergy to consider ministry in non-evangelical churches. 'What can be done?' he asked. 'Oak Hill could teach "cross-churchmanship church leadership". But the real answer is greater commitment to the gospel and less to the church cultures many ordinands come from. As Jesus said (I can't find the reference right now), "Follow me and I'll help you stay in your comfort zones".'
The complexity of the situation can be spelt out thus:
1. Some dioceses are not taking their full "allocation" of ordinands. If 20 of the 44 dioceses take one fewer, that immediately explains the mismatch.
2. Some ordinands move from self-supporting to stipendiary during training. This means that there are more emerging from training. And some delay a year - I'm ordaining one who finished training in 2008, and has been doing a lay chaplaincy for a year - another one to add to the numbers.
3. Some ordinands won't move north, or outside their comfort zones. They want a curacy in the conevo {Conservative Evangelical} bible belt, and won't countenance going elsewhere.
4. Some rich churches could (and probably will) employ some of the unplaced as lay workers for a year and get them ordained next year. Pragmatic bishops will happily ordain them straight away. Those who play by the "rules" won't let them get ordained, which seems to me to be a dog in the manger approach.
5. There is a suspicion around that some conevos aren't really Anglican. From my recent visit to preach at Oakhill, I'd say that was unfair, though they may need a curacy to get with the programme of the CofE in all its breadth and wonder. But that's what curacies are for.
Basically, we have no proper strategy for workforce planning (and we have to live with an ethos among the clergy that hates that very concept because it runs contrary to calling, priesthood, and our way of operating when we had infinite resources). The unplaced were always going to be at the evangelical end, because that's where the majority of ordinands are coming from these days. The less choosy you are about not journeying up the candle or going middle of the road, the more likely that you'll find a job. If you want a pretty Protestant show, don't want to work with a woman leader, and won't wear the gear (stoles, vestments), the number of options you have are reducing all the time.
It needs sorting. I was urging my colleagues in the House of Bishops two weeks ago to be a bit more flexible, so that we can avoid alienating good ordinands and consigning them to the dole queue. But it's not in the nature of Diocesans to be very flexible. Here in London, we've already taken way over our numbers - but we can't afford the money to rescue all 11 of those still unplaced.
Honest comment.
Cranmer's Curate would make a couple of observations:
* An Evangelical not wanting to wear a stole is understandable (it is not a Prayer Book vestment). But cassock, surplice and preaching scarf seem reasonable and any Evangelical who refuses to wear those is being unconscionably petty and not serving the Gospel, it seems to cc.
* There are supposed to be two integrities in the Church of England on the ordination of women to the presbyterate, as John Richardson has pointed out. The conviction of those who hold to male headship in the local church ought to be at the very least respected. Your curate happens to believe that wanting to train under a male incumbent is the right biblical approach.
The last word on this (for the time being) comes from a brilliant article by the Archdeacon of Chester, Donald Allister, in the 2008 Oak Hill Yearbook. In 'Whom Shall I Send?' he encouraged Evangelical clergy to consider ministry in non-evangelical churches. 'What can be done?' he asked. 'Oak Hill could teach "cross-churchmanship church leadership". But the real answer is greater commitment to the gospel and less to the church cultures many ordinands come from. As Jesus said (I can't find the reference right now), "Follow me and I'll help you stay in your comfort zones".'
Monday, 1 June 2009
THE PARABLE OF THE MEDIA PUNDIT AND THE MP
The Lord Jesus Christ's parables are timeless in the spiritual truths they impart, but they were originally set in the context of 1st century Judaism. 21st century Britain by contrast is highly secularised - in many ways a Dawkinsocracy - but here goes for an attempt at a modern re-telling of Jesus' parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector (Luke 18v9-14).
Jesus originally told the story 'to some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else' ( Luke 18v9 - NIV).
Two men went up to St Paul's Cathedral for a memorial service for a celebrity chef, one a media pundit, the other a Member of Parliament. Sitting in his pew whilst the director-general of the BBC intoned the eulogy, the media pundit prayed about himself: 'God, I thank thee that I am not like other men - bonus-grabbing bankers, evangelical homophobes, corporate fraudsters - or even like that MP over there. I drink fairtrade tea and subscribe to Stonewall by standing order.'
But the MP wasn't looking at anybody else. His head was down and he prayed: 'God, have mercy on me, a sinner.'
Jesus concluded the original parable with the words: "I tell you that this man (the tax collector), rather the other (the Pharisee), went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted" (Luke 18v14 - NIV).
Jesus originally told the story 'to some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else' ( Luke 18v9 - NIV).
Two men went up to St Paul's Cathedral for a memorial service for a celebrity chef, one a media pundit, the other a Member of Parliament. Sitting in his pew whilst the director-general of the BBC intoned the eulogy, the media pundit prayed about himself: 'God, I thank thee that I am not like other men - bonus-grabbing bankers, evangelical homophobes, corporate fraudsters - or even like that MP over there. I drink fairtrade tea and subscribe to Stonewall by standing order.'
But the MP wasn't looking at anybody else. His head was down and he prayed: 'God, have mercy on me, a sinner.'
Jesus concluded the original parable with the words: "I tell you that this man (the tax collector), rather the other (the Pharisee), went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted" (Luke 18v14 - NIV).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
