HOW NOT TO PITCH FOR A BISHOP'S MISSION ORDER

A Bishop's Mission Order allows for a fresh expression of church to be legally established in a diocese across parish boundaries. BMOs are a useful tool for mission and allow for much-needed flexibility. Cranmer's Curate assures the youth group that the following conversation is purely fictional, though the last time he looked the London clubs did exist.

Bishop's Secretary: The Revd Kneecap is here to see you.

Bishop: Thank you, Jane. Please let him...

Kneecap enters the bishop's study with two large gentlemen in their mid-20s who stand in the doorway.

Kneecap: Hi Dave - meet Reg & Ron, my apprentices. (Sits down on the sofa with bodyguards standing behind him.) I'm about to hop on a plane for Seattle, Phil, so we'd better skip the tea and talk turkey. The thing is, we're full - to bursting. So we wanna plant a church in the Garrick Club. You'll grant the necessary BMO, won't you, and ordain Reggie here to lead it.

Bishop: The Garrick. Right...erm...Why the Garrick, may I ask?

Kneecap: It's got the kind of people in it we wanna reach.

Bishop: Um...you see...there is an Evangelical ministry already underway in that parish. I'm just not sure how helpful a church plant would be so close by. The incumbent there could actually do with a few more resources in his ministry for Christ...Have you thought of Boodle's?

Kneecap: Boodle's is not in our targeted demographic quartile, Alan. We've gotta guard our brand.

Reg & Ron in unison: Yeah, guard our brand.

Bishop: What about the Athanaeum?

Kneecap: Nah, it's too....Roy Jenkins. Listen Tony, we've got to get on and plant churches. Look at the attendance stats in your patch, not to mention the income. Not looking very pretty, is it? Not that we're in that scheme.

Bishop: Quite.

Kneecap: Let us know asap, will you Pete, or we'll go and do it anyway. Arrivederci, as they say in the trade.

Reg and Ron: Yeah, Leonardo Da Vinci.

Kneecap leaves wedged in between bodyguards.

BETTER THAN STANDARD ROSSETTI

Cranmer's Curate has just been given a recording of the Christina Rossetti Christmas carol In the Bleak Mid-Winter that makes a small change to the order of verses leading to a significant theological improvement.

Featuring Sheffield Cathedral's choir, the CD is arranged by Mrs Helen Gray, with her as the lead vocalist. It is a most beautiful piece of choral music, arranging a wonderful marriage between the traditional and the modern. Cranmer's Curate thinks he heard a tom-tom drum, traditional stringed instuments including a cello, and an electric guitar.

The three-track CD in aid of the Cathedral's Archer Project for the homeless includes a dance mix. In a reversal of roles, your curate has been driving his sons mad by playing it rather loudly in the dining room.

In the standard hymnals, the final verse focusses on our response to God Incarnate:

What can I give him,
Poor as I am?
If I were a shepherd
I would bring a lamb;
If I were a wise man
I would do my part;
Yet what I can I give him -
Give my heart.

In Mrs Gray's version, the hymn includes that verse but climaxes on the second verse:

Our God, heaven cannot hold him
Nor earth sustain;
Heaven and earth shall flee away
When he comes to reign:
In the bleak mid-winter
A stable-place sufficed
The Lord God Almighty
Jesus Christ.

Surely the youth group would agree - the right note for the crescendo.

HOW GOOD THE BIBLE IS

The Koran: not a patch on the Bible is the outstanding piece over on Heresy Corner in the wake of author Sebastian Faulks' recent comments on the literary merits of the Koran.

Says the atheist Heresiarch:

Many of the one-liners attributed to Jesus in the Gospels are radical, surprising, shocking, many-sided. Even if you don't agree with him you have to admit that he can make you think. Ditto St Paul (though I've rarely agreed with anything he said). The Koran, by contrast, seems to be designed to stop people thinking, to forestall even the possibility of debate. The New Testament wants to persuade you; the Koran wants to bludgeon you into submission.

WHAT ARE WE PAYING FOR IN THELOGICAL TRAINING?

A letter from Cranmer’s Curate to the Revd Dr Simon Vibert, Vice Principal and Director of Preaching at Wycliffe Hall Church of England theological college in Oxford:

Dear Simon, You have a track-record as an effective and faithful Anglican Evangelical minister in front-line parochial ministry and are now part of exciting developments in theological training under the leadership of Richard Turnbull at Wycliffe Hall. As a parish incumbent in one of the lowest church-going areas in the United Kingdom - South Yorkshire – I am an enthusiast for what is happening at Wycliffe.

It is in that spirit that I am getting in touch with you following the letter in the latest Evangelicals Now by Matthew Swires-Hennessy expressing disappointment in EN for running my article in support of Oak Hill in July’s edition - Reasons for backing the not posh theological college.

This is not the place to engage with his possibly valid contention that the Wycliffe Hall Council can guarantee Reformed Evangelical succession in its principal as effectively as the independent Kingham Hill trust can for Oak Hill. I am writing to you because his letter is highly revealing of a certain mindset regarding theological training within our Anglican Evangelical constituency.

It is for that reason that I am making my letter to you public – what you do with your reply is up to you.

Mr Swires-Hennessy, whose letter indicates that he has done his theological training for ordained ministry at Wycliffe Hall, insists that his ‘involvement in college level sport has meant that I have spent a good part of my week outside the ivory tower with students, many of whom are not Christians. This involvement in the wider life of the university would not be possible if the college (Wycliffe) was located in a suburb in north London’ (as is Oak Hill).

This stated rationale for the choice of one theological college over another raises a significant issue. What is expected of those undertaking theological education? Or, to put the question more bluntly, what are we as the wider Church of England paying for in theological training?

Surely we are paying for those recommended for training in the Church of England to gain a theological grounding in preparation for a life-time of Word ministry normatively in a parish? And are we not also paying for them to gain some practical experience of the diversity of Gospel opportunities in the Church of England through the college placement scheme with particular emphasis on the local parish church, in preparation for their curacy and eventually God willing incumbency?

It would be very worrying indeed if theological training were geared towards preparing people for unusual settings in the Church of England, such as a large city-centre or university church with a significant student ministry or a fresh expression targeting a specific demographic group.

Whilst these opportunities exist, the Church of England remains overwhelmingly parochially-based and there are tremendous opportunities for the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ in these more normative settings.

Surely faithfulness to the Gospel demands that that process of transition and preparation begins during theological training. A large proportion of a working week spent in Oxbridge college sport strikes this parish plodder as a little rarefied.

Warmly in Christ,

Julian Mann
The Parish Church of the Ascension
Oughtibridge
www.oughtibridgechurch.org.uk

NEED FOR A NEW GENERATION OF CHRISTIAN POLITICIANS

A report has reached Cranmer's Curate that his blog is 'right-wing'.

Your curate is mortified by the suggestion.

He is not party political. He has respect for politicians of integrity in various political parties represented in Parliament, and he regularly prays that God will raise up a new generation of Christians in politics who will be salt and light for Christ in the mainstream political parties.

Three facts may be of interest to the youth group:

* had cc been of voting age in 1945, he would have voted Labour, being convinced that its manifesto was in the best interests of the country at that point;

* when he was a schoolboy, cc went on a peace march with Mr Tony Benn, for whom he retains some degree of respect;

* though cc was elected as a Conservative delegate to the National Union of Students' conference in 1986, he subsequently resigned from the Cambridge University Conservative Association. Your curate would observe that the then wackily politically-correct antics he observed at this gathering of adolescent political hacks in Blackpool are now very much in the mainstream of British politics across the parties.

In any event, your curate hopes this knocks any right-wing suggestions firmly on the head.

SUPPORT PERSECUTED CHRISTIANS IN PAKISTAN

This letter from the Bishop of Bradford, the Rt Revd David James, shows a useful way we can:

Dear Brother and Sisters

As you will be aware, there has been considerable activity following the attacks on the Christian communities in Pakistan aiming to raise awareness of the situation with a view to trying to change the law on blasphemy and to improve the security of the Christian community there. The Archbishop’s statement and those of Pope Benedict and the WCC were important contributors, as were statements by a number of Muslim leaders in this country and elsewhere. We are working on a range of further initiatives in close touch with the Church in Pakistan and these include raising relief funds for those affected, a delegation of Christian and Muslim leaders led by myself on behalf of the Archbishop and an open letter which is the subject of this email:

I am looking for your support in relation to the open letter/petition:

Blasphemy law in Pakistan: open petition

Christians and Muslims around the world as well as people of other faiths and those who do not adhere to any religion will have been hearing with real concern, the news of the attacks on the Christian villages of Gojra and Qorian in Pakistan resulting in the deaths of at least seven innocent men, women and children. This was the latest in such attacks over many years and has attracted international condemnation from religious and political leadership in Pakistan and internationally. Following widespread discussions with Christian partners and correspondents in Pakistan, Christian and Muslim organisations in the United Kingdom and with the Pakistan authorities, there is a desire amongst many people to express their concerns to the Government of Pakistan and to press for change in the blasphemy legislation and for the protection of Christians and others who are suffering from its abuse. To this end a petition is now available to be signed electronically and can be reached by clicking here and following the instructions.

One of the causes of such attacks is the ability of extremists, and others with private motivations, to incite attacks on Christians and on occasion also on Muslims; and the inability of the police and local judiciary to protect innocent people. The blasphemy laws currently in force in Pakistan provide such people with the means to incite violence and seem to have played a part in the recent incidents which led to the death of a number of Christians.

Sign petition here

The petition will be delivered to the Pakistan Government and is intended to assist in their efforts to prevent further attacks. The more people who sign, the more effective the petition will be and we urge you to take action now by:

* signing the petition yourself

* by putting this letter prominently on your own and as many other websites as possible.

It is by actions such as these that people of faith and of goodwill can show their active concern for the good of the world and in this case their support of the Christian community of Pakistan

Please do sign today – one click makes it possible!

Yours

+ David

TOUGHER INTERVIEW FOR TONY BLAIR THAN COSY HTB CHAT-SHOW

This commentary by Cranmer's Curate on the recent interview at Holy Trinity Brompton with former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair features in VirtueOnline's Viewpoints. What question would you like to put to Tony Blair if he came to your church to be interviewed by the vicar?

The Church of England Newspaper report of Mr Blair’s interview with Alpha founder the Revd Nicky Gumbel at London’s Holy Trinity Brompton includes questions about the former UK Prime Minister’s religious awakening at Oxford University; how he copes with difficult headlines; how he finds time for prayer and Bible reading in the midst of his Faith Foundation globe-trotting; and how he managed to secure an audience with Bono.

During Mr Blair’s ten years in charge of the country from 1997 to 2007, the age of consent for homosexuals was lowered from eighteen to sixteen (prior to 1994 it had been twenty-one), removing the distinction in UK law between heterosexuality and homosexuality and also leading to an increase in sexually transmitted diseases amongst adolescents.

Civil partnerships were introduced, creating a same-sex imitation of the God-created institution of heterosexual marriage and leaving Christian marriage registrars with a livelihood-threatening crisis of conscience.

The Sexual Orientation Regulations were introduced, forcing Roman Catholic adoption agencies to close because they refused to place children with homosexual couples and also facing Christian hoteliers with the threat of bankrupting legal actions; and now the Equality Bill looms with more horrors for orthodox, Nicene Christians in the secular workplace.

For all his intellectual, communication, and leadership qualities, Mr Blair’s administration entrenched the permissive society in Britain and firmly laid the foundations for the persecution of Christ’s followers and servants.

‘How do you square all that with your profession of Christian faith, Mr Blair?’ would surely be a reasonable if challenging question. But Mr Blair was spared anything approaching that from the Revd Gumbel during the cosy chat-show in front of a packed Knightsbridge church of 1,200.

The most challenging question was: ‘Do you think you were right not to talk about God when you were in office?’ That produced quite an illuminating answer and in fact Mr Blair’s former press officer Alastair Campbell emerged with some credit in the advice he gave. Mr Campbell was concerned that if Mr Blair gave public interviews about his faith whilst leader of the opposition, he would give off the message that you can only be a proper Christian if you vote Labour.

But that was as tough as it got.

Thank the good Lord, there is a much tougher interview to come with the One who will ‘rescue the weak and needy’ and ‘deliver them from the hand of the wicked’ (Psalm 82v4 – NIV).

WHY A PROTESTANT POLICE FORCE DIDN’T WEAR THE BURKHA

The Sheffield policewomen who paraded themselves in head-to-toe burkhas as part of a diversity drive need to be forgiven for they know not what they do.

They are being swept up in a massive ideological delusion that has bewitched post-Christian Britain. It is the idea that tolerating a religio-cultural practice is the same as embracing it.

The Revd David Holloway in his magnificent book Church and State in the New Millennium (HarperCollins, 2000) describes what religious tolerance has traditionally meant in Protestant societies:

‘Since the Reformation the West has developed an important tradition of religious tolerance. This must be preserved. The assumption is that tolerance is not the same as indifference. Tolerance means you allow to continue without legal interference beliefs or practices of which you personally disapprove and think wrong. Indifference means that you do not mind or care what other people believe or do’ (p13).

The Protestant culture that established Britain’s police force did not ban the burkha but did not wear it and there was a fundamental theological reason for that – Christian Britain believed that men and women were made in the image of God the Holy Trinity. The idea that a person made in the image of God has to be covered from head to foot such that you cannot see their face was spiritually and morally abhorrent.

Tragically, the reason the Sheffield policewomen who took part in the recent publicity exercise do not share that conviction is because the secular culture that has nurtured them, and now the organisation they work for, has repudiated the biblical understanding of humanity as created in the image of God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

The future practical consequences of the loss of that basic Christian conviction for the policing of our country are too horrible to contemplate.

Meanwhile, Cranmer’s Curate is not placing bets on South Yorkshire police officers being ordered to engage in Christian street preaching in the next diversity stunt.

LOSE CHRISTIAN CULTURE LOSE YOUR LOCAL

Cranmer's Curate wrote to the hospitable atheist Heresiarch over on Heresy Corner with the sad news of the closure of his local - pub not church (at least by God's grace not yet). This prompted the H to write an incisive piece about pub closures more generally - Three views of pub closure - which cc commends to the youth group (though he doesn't commend atheism). Here's your curate's original letter:

Dear Heresiarch, When Mark 'Shirty' Shirtliff took on the Hare & Hound in the parish four years ago, it had a reputation as a drugs' den. Shirty cleaned the pub up by facing down the dealers and under his stewardship it developed a wholesome atmosphere. A group of us regularly went down from the church to participate in the Thursday night quiz night which Shirty started and the improvement was noticeable. This was a pub that deserved to succeed.

But back from holiday as I was going down to play tennis in the local park with our youngest son, I saw Shirty drinking outside the rival Cock Inn in the sunshine. 'Helping out the competition?' I joked rather tactlessly only to be told the sad news.

Heresy Corner readers will be very familiar with the factors that have created a situation in which around 52 local pubs are closing each week - increased beer tax, competition from cheap supermarket alcohol, the smoking ban and now the economic recession.

But a key factor that is not sufficiently acknowledged is the overweening egoism of post-Christian Britain. The local - whether it be the pub, the church, local theatre, brass band or other voluntary association - was supported by previous generations because it had been there before they were born and, they assumed, would be there after they had finished their brief sparrow's flight through this mortal life. We children of Woodstock, by contrast, wish to engage in community on strictly autonomous terms and appear to have genuinely convinced ourselves that we can get back to the Garden without divine intervention or at least to that part of the Garden that most suits our individual tastes.

In the highly communal society of 1st century Judaism, the Lord Jesus Christ was criticised for social drinking - he was accused by the Pharisaic establishment of being 'a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners' (Matthew 11v19). If the tragedy that has enveloped publicans like Shirty is allowed to go on, then it is to be feared that it will be much less socially possible to level that criticism at Christ's followers in a growing number of local communities in Britain today.

Kind regards,

Cranmer's Curate

DEANERY REVIEW: RESCUING CAVALRY OR STATIONARY STEAM-ENGINE?

This article by Cranmer's Curate appeared in August's edition of the Forward in Faith magazine New Directions:

Deanery reviews are increasingly being seen as the rescuing cavalry for a national church in decline. But serious spiritual and practical questions must be asked of them. The stated rationale clearly varies from diocese to diocese, but the common theme is the need to address decline and for decisions about the deployment of the reduced number of stipendiary clergy to be owned at the local level. Consultants are then hired; meetings held; reports produced. There are promises of 'resources' for smaller churches. But the questions over the spiritual value and practical direction of such activism centre on two things.

The practical reality
The first is the fact that a closer working relationship between churches in a deanery brings the theological diversity of the Church of England much closer to home. There can of course be value in gaining input from the ministry and experience of other churches, but the major problem for fragile small churches like the one I am privileged to serve is that of getting too hugger-mugger with false teachers. It is significant that it tends to be those who take their theological orthodoxy seriously - Classic Evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics - who are the least enthusiastic about deanery reviews.

The second is the relative insignificance of the deanery as an ecclesiastical entity. The practical reality is that deaneries do not appoint clergy and they do not pay parish share. Bishops in their dioceses do the former; local parish churches do the latter.

A diocese has significance. It has a bishop and other senior staff who are responsible for appointing clergy, deploying them, supporting them and disciplining them when necessary; it has an administrative centre at diocesan church house and staff who are responsible for administering clergy stipends and looking after parsonage houses.

A parish has significance - a community served by a local church and its minister of Word and Sacrament is conceivable. Clearly, it is more easily conceivable as an ecclesiastical district in a village or a suburb than as an arguably arbitrary demarcation in an urban area. But nonetheless the concept has practical cash value.

Motivating churchgoers
But a deanery? What 'resources' can churches in discrete local communities clustered within a subdivision of a diocese, which in practical terms comprises an area dean and a synod, actually offer one another? Surely people are too busy sustaining the ministry of their own parish churches to attend more meetings?

The 'resource' we need more of, as a small church that is looking by God's grace to become viable, is serving, giving, praying Christian disciples who will commit themselves to the parish church and its mission for Christ. If the sharing of resources means clergy and active laity straddling two or more churches in their deanery, how helpful is that in creating sustainable Christian communities? Doesn't that mean in practice that already stretched people spread themselves even more thinly?

It would be encouraging and hugely helpful for us if some of the commuters to other parishes would transfer to their own local church and help to sustain its ministry financially and in prayer. But they have already made their decision to join another local church, often outside the deanery.

From the roving microphone at the front of the revamped deanery synod, now meeting around cafe-style tables, it may be freely admitted that most people in the pews aren't really bothered about the deanery. But it is our role as clergy and deanery synod representatives to educate them and motivate them to get behind the process, which has been endorsed by an overwhelming majority (resounding applause).

My Victorian ancestors used to manufacture steam-engines in Leeds before the firm went bankrupt at the turn of the last century. As anyone who has worked in that industry will know, stationary steam-engines can make an awful lot of noise, especially when they are not going anywhere.

ONE STRAIGHTFORWARD SOLUTION TO 22

The misery inflicted on young women by the permissive society and the sexual revolution is brilliantly expressed by the pop singer Lily Allen in her latest record, 22, which Cranmer's Curate recently heard on the radio:

When she was 22 the future looked bright
But she's nearly 30 now and she's out every night
I see that look in her face, she's got that look in her eye
She's thinking how did I get here and wondering why

It's sad but it's true how society says her life is already over
There's nothing to do and there's nothing to say
'Til the man of her dreams comes along
Picks her up and puts her over his shoulder
It seems so unlikely in this day and age

She's got an alright job but it's not a career
Whenever she thinks about it, it brings her to tears
'Cause all she wants is a boyfriend, she gets one night stands
She's thinking how did I get here, I'm doing all that I can

The solution to the problem so eloquently highlighted by Miss Allen is straightforward. Women should refuse to have sexual relations with men until one of them is honourable enough to look them in the eye and make the following promise (best expressed in English in the Book of Common Prayer but not restricted to it):

With this ring I thee wed, with my body I thee worship, and with all my worldly goods I thee endow: In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

POSTMODERN GANGSTER IS PUBLIC ENEMY

Mr Johnny Depp's decision to play 1930s' gangster, John Dillinger, as a combination of Elvis Presley and Dean Martin in the film Public Enemies made for a magnificent performance.

Cranmer's Curate saw the film just before the holidays. The performance by Mr Christian Bale (aka Batman) as the FBI agent who eventually pursues Dillinger to his death outside a Chicago cinema is also very compelling.

But it is Mr Depp's characterisation of Dillinger that makes the film so remarkable and he is certainly deserving of an Oscar for his achievement. However, your curate would submit - with the greatest of respect - that Mr Depp should have turned down the role on moral grounds.

Historically, John Dillinger was a vicious and violent criminal who terrorised the law-abiding public and killed policemen but Public Enemies' presentation of him turns him into a sympathetic character, a postmodern Robin Hood who, together with his girlfriend Evelyn "Billie" Frechette, for a while at least defies the forces of the Sheriff of Nottingham in the form of FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover.

In the film, Dillinger's death at the hands of the FBI is presented as a martyrdom whereas in reality J. Edgar Hoover did American society a huge service in taking a tough line against such evil terrorists. Hoover's methods for dealing with the scourge were not always those a moral person could countenance and indeed the strain on the conscience of Mr Bale's character, agent Melvin Purvis, resulted in his resignation from the FBI in 1935. But Hoover's vision for proactively tackling the gangsters was morally sound.

A civilisation that glamorises gangster bullies is in profound spiritual and moral trouble. You only have to compare the loving, mankind-saving Martyrdom of the Lord Jesus Christ on the Cross for the sins of the whole world with its tawdry postmodern imitation in Public Enemies to see why.

CRUCIFIED MAN HAS THEOLOGICAL ANSWER TO ASSISTED SUICIDE

Secular Britain is intent on delivering the lethal injection of assisted suicide, but sound theology from an unlikely source provides the basis for a clear Christian response.

Godless humanism can come up with good pragmatic reasons for intervening to precipitate death but the theologian we Christians should listen to on this matter is the penitent murderer on the cross next to Jesus:

And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us. But the other rebuked him, saying, Dost thou not fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise (Luke 23v39-43 – Authorised Version).

The penitent criminal has grasped three basic theological truths:

· He is a creature, God is the Creator and therefore has the power over life and death – ‘Dost thou not fear God?’

· Death is the wages of sin and in his individual case the capital punishment meted out by the State acting on behalf of Almighty God for his evil deeds - ‘And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds.’

· The Lord Jesus Christ is the divine King who has the power to defeat sin and death and thus open the kingdom of heaven to all believers - ‘Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.’

The virulently secular, man-centred, post-1960s pressure towards assisted suicide is basically God-hating – it seeks to usurp God’s prerogative to determine the moment and the manner of our death and instead to delegate that power to sinful, finite, created humanity.

The murderer on the cross grasped the fact that God has not abdicated His divine prerogative and therefore right-thinking people should listen to the insight given to him at the moment of his death rather than sacrificing on the altar of the Molech of assisted suicide, so beloved of the liberal legal and political establishment.

This unnamed figure in the Gospel record realised that we are creatures, God Almighty is our Creator and so on the basis of his sound biblical theology we can conclude that a human intervention to bring about death, except in the matter of capital punishment by the State and the pursuit of a just war, is a clear and reprehensible breach of the Sixth Commandment.

Christians should speak out against moves to undermine the Suicide Act 1961, which is a thoroughly workable piece of legislation reflecting Christian Britain's belief in our creaturely status as human beings made in the image of God.