TWITTERING RELIGIOUS INQUISITION IN BRITAIN

Religious zeal is the only explanation for the police questioning of a 67-year-old grandmother after she wrote to her local council objecting to a homosexual parade in Norwich. Mrs Howe represents no threat to public order – her offence is against the dogma of the politically-correct inquisition now underway in Britain, instigated by a twittering high priestly caste of homosexual rights activists and diversity enforcers.

Like all spiritually-motivated, idolatrous inquisitions in human history from Nero's to the Spanish to Stalin's, the current PC one makes an irrational connection between the expression of an opinion against its religious dogma and acts of criminality, such as the appalling assault on a gay police cadet in Liverpool.

Christians need to be spiritually and mentally prepared for the following:

· Infiltration of our churches and charities by police informers. Some of us may even face denunciation by family members and close friends, as our Lord Jesus Christ warned his disciples in the gospels (cf Mark 13v12-13 and Luke 21v16: 'You will be delivered up even by parents and brothers and kinsmen and friends, and some of you will be put to death' - RSV).

· The temptation to be disrespectful towards the secular authorities and/or withdraw from civic life. The fact that in faithfulness to the Bible's teaching we will have to risk prosecution under their 'hate speech' laws in our churches and in the marketplace of ideas does not mean that we should dismiss the political authorities as totally godless or disengage from society. Intense religious persecution of Christians was the background for the apostolic exhortations to honour political leaders and participate rightly in civic society for the sake of Christian witness (cf Romans 13v1-7; 1 Peter 2v13-17).

· The emergence of a State-approved Church, with a Stonewall-nominated Archbishop, which will promote political correctness amongst the Christian community in exchange for privileges. There could well be financial and employment incentives for Christians to register with the State Church. Under such circumstances, the example of Moses who chose to suffer ill-treatment with the people of God needs to guide us: 'He considered abuse suffered for the Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt, for he looked to the reward' (Hebrews 11v26).

· The pressure to form ill-judged and damaging alliances with right-wing or otherwise counter-cultural groups such as the BNP who purport to support Christianity and who are prepared to voice unpolitically-correct views on subjects such as Islam and homosexuality. It is vital that Christians firmly distance themselves from the BNP in particular both because its views on race are anti-Christian and also because it is evangelistically deleterious to be associated with such a nasty party. The Apostle Paul's words need to be at the front of our minds: 'Conduct yourselves wisely towards outsiders, making the most of the time. Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone' (Colossians 4v5-6 - RSV).

By God's grace, we can comfort ourselves with the thought that unlike biblical Christianity the new PC religion is irrational and incoherent. Like the darkly superstitious and credulous pagan cults that dominated the British Isles prior to their Christian evangelisation in the Sixth and Seventh Centuries AD, it is a twittering religion in more senses than one.

BILDAD THE SHUHITE IS WRONG - THANK GOD

As Cranmer's Curate takes half-term off, he leaves the youth group with: -

the BCP Collect for today (Trinity 20):

O Almighty and most merciful God, of thy bountiful goodness keep us, we beseech thee, from all things that may hurt us: that we, being ready both in body and soul, may cheerfully accomplish those things that thou wouldest have done; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

And the words of Bildad the Shuhite, one of Job's discomforters, which cc recently read in his journey through the Old Testament:

Dominion and fear are with God; he makes peace in his high heaven. Is there any number to his armies? Upon whom does his light not arise? How then can man be in the right before God? How can he who is born of woman be pure? Behold, even the moon is not bright, and the stars are not pure in his eyes; how much less man, who is a maggot, and the son of man, who is a worm! (Job 25v1-6 ESV)

By God's grace, Bildad is wrong. Wonderfully, unrighteous humanity can be justified in God's sight through through faith in the righteous Sufferer, Jesus Christ the eternal Son of Man.

TIME TO ELECT REFORM

The situation created by the potential move to Rome of many thousands of Anglo-Catholic co-belligerents in the battle against revisionism presents Reform with a new challenge.

A mass Forward in Faith exodus would leave two suitors for the heart and soul of the Church of England – Reform and its evangelical charismatic allies and the liberal revisionists and their open evangelical allies.

For Reform to be a serious contender involves much more than donning a better brand of aftershave or discarding those old corduroys and that elbow-padded cardigan but a fundamental change in its manner of operating.

Contested elections for both Chairman and Council are needed to change Reform from a public school friendship network into a credible force for Evangelical change in the Church of England. Elections by ballot of the membership for a 50-50 clergy-lay Reform Council could bring the following benefits:

· Greater ownership of the Reform agenda by the membership. Currently, the network carries too many passengers.

· Greater representation on the Council for Church of England parish churches serving less affluent communities. The current Reform Council is dominated by clergy from the large Conservative Evangelical flagships and their church plants in the more affluent parts of the country.

· A strong local mandate for any members of the Reform Council consecrated bishop by an overseas Primate. A charge of parachuting in bishops could not so easily be levelled.

The Church of the nation is worth saving in the cause of Christ and his gospel of eternal salvation for all who believe and trust in Him. A radical shake-up of Reform is now needed to make that more possible.

WILL ‘JOBS FOR THE GIRLS’ FUEL THE NASTY PARTY?

Over on Heresy Corner, the hospitable and civilised atheist Heresiarch has published a guest-post by Cranmer's Curate on how positive discrimination in politics might play into the hands of the BNP. The BNP's commandeering of Christianity in its shameful cause your curate utterly deplores. The piece may be of interest to the youth group.

SMALL CHANGE IN CLASSIC HYMN REVEALS REVISIONIST AGENDA

This article by Cranmer's Curate first appeared on US-based global Anglican news service, VirtueOnline, in its As Eye See It section. Thanks go to veteran news journalist David Virtue for getting your curate to do his homework properly:

It is a small change in the magnificent Timothy Dudley-Smith hymn ‘Lord for the years’ but one that is opening up a world of difference between orthodox Anglicans and the revisionists.

The fourth verse of this hymn by the Anglican Evangelical hymn writer, former bishop of Thetford and biographer of Dr John Stott has until recently been sung as follows:

‘Lord, for our world where men disown and doubt you, loveless in strength and comfortless in pain, hungry and helpless, lost indeed without you: Lord of the world, we pray that Christ may reign.’

But in versions becoming increasingly common in Anglican corporate worship this has been changed to: ‘Lord for our world, when we disown and doubt you...’

This may seem a very trivial change and one made primarily for reasons of ‘inclusive language’. It may also seem much more humble than the original. We are identifying with a sinful world and taking our share of the blame for the lost state that it is in but the theological change is significant. It reflects the fact that the revisionists want to use our hymnody but use it on their terms and exploit small holes in our defences in order to make significant theological breaches.

When he first penned this great hymn, Bishop Dudley-Smith was reflecting traditional Anglican theology that there is a distinction between the Church and the world. The Church of the Lord Jesus Christ has been called out of a rebellious, fallen, under-judgement world to believe and trust in Him as Lord and Saviour for God’s eternity. Though we Christians have many failings, which are acknowledged in the hymn, disowning and doubting the Lord should not be one of them. In fact, being 'loveless in strength' and 'comfortless in pain' cannot true of the Bride of Christ, because of the intrinsic difference between Church and world.

Elsewhere in the hymn, ‘we’ clearly refers to Christians. In the last verse we pray for ‘ourselves’, asking the Lord in living power to remake us – ‘self on the cross and Christ upon the throne, past put behind us, for the future take us: Lord of our lives, to live for Christ alone’.

Is it not the case that this blurring of the distinction between Church and world is what is firing the revisionist agenda in the Anglican Communion? It is the idea that spirit of Christ somehow reveals his aspirations for his Church through the changing culture. The Christian faith is thus not a revealed religion but an evolving one.

So if you must make a change for the sake of inclusive language in this classic Evangelical hymn, please don’t put ‘we’ but ‘they’. That is not a matter of arrogance, but rather faithfulness to the revealed truth of the apostolic faith once delivered to the saints.

COPING WITH THE CHURCH'S MISSION-BLOCKERS

Cranmer's Curate has been asked by the Revd Stephen Walton, of Marbury, Cheshire to post this article that appeared in New Directions in January 2008:

Can we counter those who disrupt the progress of a church's mission agenda? Julian Mann explains a possible course of action and a change in church rules

I do not usually remember my dreams, but this one was vivid. The toddlers were about to come into the church for their Monday afternoon service and there I was setting up for them.

But as I stood at the church door, I noticed that all the stone steps had been dug up and large, broken paving stones had been piled up in front of the door. The entrance had been drastically narrowed, and I thought to myself, 'How on earth are they going to get in, and how on earth am I going to get out?'

The person behind this frightening spectacle was a member of the PCC who used to be somewhat of an ally but in recent times had started hooking up with the 'mission blockers', those who previously held sway in the congregation but whose authority is now being challenged by the mission agenda.

Nightmare and reality

Choirs, as many clergy have discovered to their cost, are of course a classic power-base for the mission-blockers.

It was a great relief to find that when I did go to set up for the tots, the entrance was intact. The dream owed more to anxiety than to reality.

Nonetheless, mission-blocking in small parish churches is a reality and unless mission is unblocked, these churches will forever stay small.

Special measures

To counter mission-blocking, the Church Representation Rules need to be changed so that churches that pay less than £25,000 per annum in parish share, and/or have a congregation of fewer than sixty adults on a normal Sunday, are made subject to special measures.

These special measures would be clearly explained to all the members of the PCC during the interregnum and their acceptance by a two-thirds majority would be the condition of any future appointment.

These special measures would mean:

(1) The incumbent can apply to the archdeacon for the removal of 'mission-blockers' from the PCC. The assumption is that the application would under normal circumstances be accepted. This would apply to PCC members who have voted against or abstained on a proposal for change to existing practices brought by the incumbent on three occasions.

Under the measures, the voting record of individual PCC members would be logged. Provided the incumbent has allowed at least two meetings for the changes to be fully debated with a supporting paper, the provision would apply.

In practice, it would be rare for this provision to have to be resorted to. The point of it is to create a change of culture and attitude on PCCs. Such a measure is, and this is worth pointing out to those who might be surprised by it, completely consistent with the 1956 PCC legislation under which the first function of the PCC is to cooperate with the incumbent.

Service times

(2) The incumbent would be given clear permission to alter non-standard service times in a parish church without a formal vote by the PCC. So, take an incumbent who comes to a church that has developed a monthly pattern of three Sung Eucharists at 10 a.m., with a family service at 11 a.m. on the fourth Sunday with a 9 a.m. BCP Communion. He can immediately introduce a standard service time of 10.30 a.m on every Sunday.

Non-standard service times are a deliberate barrier to growth. The in-crowd may well understand them, but they are confusing to the outsiders that the church needs to be reaching.

(3) Under the special measures, it would be clearly set out that the incumbent's canonical duty is to implement growth-allowing change. An expectation is thus created that change is on the agenda for the sake of Christ's mission.

Of course, none of these changes by themselves will stop front-line clergy from having anxiety dreams, but they would help prevent the nightmares from becoming reality.

GETTING THE PCC ON YOUR SIDE

If an incumbent has been in post for seven years and he hasn’t got his PCC on his side, then that’s his fault.

That was the comment in question time at the Reform Conference last week from the vicar of Jesmond Parish Church in Newcastle, the Revd David Holloway.

Cranmer’s Curate actually finds this perspective from Mr Holloway rather refreshing. It gets away from the victim-culture we clergy can all too easily subject ourselves to - ‘oh poor me, things aren’t going well, it’s all the fault of that ungodly lot I’ve been landed with’.

But the comment does need teasing out and so cc rang Mr Holloway on Friday to explore it further. Mr Holloway clarified that it is not necessarily a moral fault in an incumbent but rather a failure to understand how organisations work humanly-speaking and to communicate effectively with people both formally and informally to ensure that they are educated in the issues.

Your curate pointed out that in small churches individuals who are inclined to be obstructive and unsupportive can make much more impact for the negative. Also, whilst the Church Representation Rules do allow for fixed terms of office for PCC members, it can be difficult to implement them in a small church where you simply have not got ready replacements for the key posts.

Mr Holloway recognised this, but helpfully pointed out that the Church Representation Rules clearly state that those volunteering to come on PCCs are supposed to ‘co-operate’ with their incumbent. A bit of lateral thinking by the incumbent can ensure that that spirit is being reinforced eg gently questioning candidates for PCCs at the Annual Parochial Church Meeting and asking them where they stand on the key issues facing the church.

Your curate would add a further observation with which Mr Holloway would doubtless agree - in getting the PCC 'on our side' we need to make sure it's Christ's Kingdom we're serving not our own little empire. Sadly it is possible for quite orthodox clergy to get the PCC on their side through manipulation, sliminess and in some cases downright mendacity. Christ's Kingdom is not served by those methods.

So, a wise and incisive comment from David Holloway – though your curate wonders whether for his next sabbatical Mr Holloway might like to consider doing a three-month house for duty in a small parish church. It would make for an interesting Reform booklet.

ANGLICAN MAINSTREAM IS...MAINSTREAM

Cranmer's Curate has noticed a recent tendency among some Anglican Evangelical speakers and writers, who would be nominal supporters of Anglican Mainstream, to try to stand above the argument by analysing the names of the various groupings.

Anglican Mainstream is hardly going to call itself Anglican Fringe, any more than Fulcrum is going to call itself Marginal or Thinking Anglicans are going to call themselves Unthinking Anglicans, they are fond of pointing out. An Anglican writer in the Evangelical press recently identified the 'sub-text' in the names: Fulcrum - we're balanced, you're not; Thinking Anglicans - we think, you're thoughtless; Anglican Mainstream - we're mainstream, you're fringe.

It's almost as if these speakers and writers are trying to be even-handed and statesmanlike by including the organisation they would nominally support in the list. Perhaps they think they're promoting Christian unity by doing so.

But whatever their motivation let's be clear on the facts. Anglican Mainstream is what it says on the tin: mainstream. This orthodox coalition within the Anglican Communion stands for the biblical theology of the Book of Common Prayer, the 39 Articles of Religion and the Ordinal. In this country, it is standing up for the official doctrine of the Church of England as expressed in Canon A5. And the numerical fact is that Anglican Mainstream's orthodox stance happens to be supported by the majority of Anglicans living in the world today.

That should not be a cause for arrogance or triumphalism but it does mean that the name 'Anglican Mainstream' does carry integrity. In the interests of factual truth, if not loyalty to faithful, confessing Anglicans who are contending for Christ's revealed, biblical gospel of eternal salvation, that should be widely acknowledged.

VICTORY OVER THE TALEBAN WOULD HELP THE CHURCH

The Christian argument in support of British troops in Afghanistan is not one that lends itself to advancement by sound-bite.

On BBC Radio Sheffield on Sunday morning, Cranmer's Curate struggled to make the case in the teeth of interruptions by the interviewer. The panel was asked whether Tony Blair was a war criminal and that led to a discussion about the current conflict in Afghanistan.

Your curate is convinced that the British Army is fighting honourably against the Taleban in Afghanistan. Whilst he thoroughly respects any members of the youth group who are either Christian pacifists or who are convinced that this is not a just war, cc is persuaded that the Christian-influenced democracies of the West have a moral responsibility before God to ensure that Afghanistan does not turn into a rogue state spreading Taleban-sponsored terrorism to its immediate region and beyond.

The British Army remains an honourable institution, one of the last in the United Kingdom of which that could be said. Thankfully, its courage, dedication and professionalism have not been unduly undermined by political correctness, though one should never be complacent about that. What is absolutely scandalous is the fact that Her Majesty's armed forces have not been supplied with the equipment they need to prosecute this campaign with the maximum effectiveness and security for our troops.

Cranmer's Curate is persuaded that victory over the Taleban would help the fledgling Christian Church in Afghanistan and thus enhance the spread of Christ's saving gospel in that region. That's why cc for one is praying for a victorious outcome for our soldiers in the words of the Book of Common Prayer's supplication in time of war and tumults:

O Almighty God, King of all kings, and Governor of all things, whose power no creature is able to resist, to whom it belongeth justly to punish sinners, and to be merciful to them that truly repent: Save and deliver us, we humbly beseech thee, from the hands of our enemies; abate their pride, aswage their malice, and confound their devices; that we, being armed with thy defence, may be preserved evermore from all perils, to glorify thee, who art the only giver of all victory; through the merits of thy only Son, Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

MARRIAGE & LOCAL CHURCH IMPACTED BY WOMEN'S ORDINATION

An increasingly common outcome from the ordination of women is having an impact both on Christian marriage and on the local church. Where a husband and a wife are both ordained and are licensed to different parishes, that effectively means that they are longer part of the same local church.

Cranmer's Curate would argue on the basis of a Christian theology of both marriage and the local church that this is a most undesirable outcome.

The Lord Jesus Christ taught clearly that in the God-created institution of heterosexual marriage husband and wife become 'one flesh' (cf Mark 10v8). That oneness encompasses various aspects but at the heart of the union is the worship of the living God who has revealed his saving nature in Christ.

Do a Christian husband and wife have to belong to the same local church in order to worship together? Whilst of course worship encompasses the whole of life and is not confined to church, nonetheless our commitment to the body of Christ is a vital part of our worship. The Apostle Paul gives the local church the highest possible estimation: 'Do you not know,' he writes to the local church at Corinth, 'that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you? If any one destroys God's temple, God will destroy him. For God's temple is holy and that temple you are' (1 Corinthians 3v16-17 - RSV).

Therefore, for a Christian husband and wife deliberately to choose to belong to different local churches seems to run counter both to the 'oneness' God creates in marriage and to the New Testament's estimation of the spiritual importance of the local church.

TAX-PAYER FUNDS PC SHRINE IN ENGLISH CATHEDRALS

This by Cranmer's Curate appeared on VirtueOnline's As Eye See It:

Which English cathedral will be the first to appoint a government-funded diversity officer to enforce political correctness in its services?

The decision by two cathedrals, Blackburn and Bradford, to appoint Muslims to their staff raises the question. Political correctness is an integrated ideological package promoted by the liberal elite, embracing the multi-faith agenda, pan-sexuality and the blurring of God-given differences between the sexes. So, if the Baal of PC is given a shrine in a cathedral, then it will not be too long before he wants to check the service sheet.

Church of England Newspaper columnist, Andrew Carey, had the courage to denounce the apppointments in his column of October 2nd. Of the Bradford appointment he wrote:

Yet another Cathedral has appointed a Muslim to its staff prompting the question of whether a Mosque will ever reciprocate. Bradford Cathedral’s decision to appoint Nuzhat Ali, as its Interfaith Development Officer, has barely drawn any controversy, let alone surprise.

Canon Chris Chivers of Blackburn Cathedral, the first to employ a Muslim, pre-empted any protest: “There are always going to be people with extreme views who will have difficulties with this. However if you are firm and strong in your faith then what is the problem in talking to someone of a different faith? What are you going to lose?”

If ever a straw man deserved to be knocked down it is this one. Firstly, the implication that you are an extremist if you have reservations about employing a Muslim in a Cathedral is misleading and surely deliberately insulting. Secondly, the idea that ‘talking to someone of a different faith’ automatically equates to employing them is clearly questionable.

It is clear that Nuzhat Ali will have some kind of theological role in the Cathedral including holding ‘Scriptural Reasoning Workshops’ and giving lectures. I’d object to this appointment on the grounds that it implies a recognition of her Islamic theology as on a par with the Christian theology. Furthermore, as the Church of England experiences frontline cuts of clergy across the dioceses, I have even greater concern over such diversions of funding from Christian mission.

This prompted a letter against Andrew Carey from Canon Chivers in the October 9th edition of the CEN. Complaining that his 'lengthy and nuanced conversation' with a CEN staff reporter had been 'conflated into into a misleading sound-bite suggesting that anyone who didn’t agree with such appointments was an extremist', he acknowleged that he did say that 'such appointments should be judged on the theological basis by which they were made'.

The conclusion of Canon Chivers letter is deeply revealing of his own theological basis:

Pick up the phone Andrew – my number’s in Crockford’s, as elsewhere – and I could really have helped you out of the hole you’ve dug for yourself. Firstly, I could have informed you that yes, an Anglican priest has already worked from a mosque in Burnley – as part of the groundbreaking Building Bridges project there. As secondly, I could have disabused you of the notion that the money involved has somehow been diverted from church coffers at a time of ‘frontline cuts’. In both cases the costs are being borne by Government agencies, in other words they come from the public purse.

Of course, you may not be happy with this either. But if you aren’t, at least you could have said so on the basis of fact not conjecture. More importantly, the two of us might perhaps have got past these false assumptions – and my irritation at your cavalier journalism – and onto some real theology, and the belief I share with many others that talking to people of different faiths and world views is part and parcel of the Missio Deo: God’s conversation with the world in the incarnation. The Government somehow seems to have got hold of the importance for society of this pattern of divine self-communication and the conversations it’s meant to inspire. I’m praying that you might one day do the same.

So there you have it from the Canon Chancellor of an English cathedral: church liberals and secular PC activists are colluding in the appointment of non-Christians to the theological staff of English cathedrals with the tax-payer footing the bill for 'this pattern of divine self-communication and the conversations it's meant to inspire'.

And Canon Chivers has the audacity to pray that a faithful, confessing Anglican - and a fine journalist - like Andrew Carey will start worshipping at the shrine to PC. Fortunately for Andrew Carey, the God and Father of the Lord Jesus Christ, mankind's only Lord and Saviour, is not inclined to answer that kind of prayer.

NEW BISHOP OF SHEFFIELD'S FIRST 100 DAYS

This article by Cranmer's Curate appeared in Friday's Church of England Newspaper:

Dr Steven Croft’s first 100 days as new Bishop of Sheffield have already proved significant.

Nettles are being grasped, especially ministry provision on the north Sheffield estates. Dr Croft has just announced a Bishop’s Commission to look at ministry and mission in this inner urban area covering six parishes with eight churches. Church attendance figures rank this 70,000-population area as among the lowest in the UK and parts of it are ranked very high on the government’s indices of social deprivation.

The average Sunday attendance in the eight churches is approximately 300, equivalent to less than 0.5 per cent of the population. With other Christian denominations included, the churchgoing proportion is around one per cent.

Former bishop of Repton, now assistant bishop in Sheffield, the Rt Rev David Hawtin, is the chairman of the commission. Whilst the Derbyshire village with the eponymous public school would not normally be associated with inner-city ministry, the commission’s members have been chosen on the basis of front-line urban experience and insight.

The location and focus of fresh expressions of church and the use of Bishop’s Mission Orders are likely to be on the commission’s agenda, as well as the more traditional routes of pastoral reorganisation and redeployment of clergy.

The new commission constitutes a bold initiative by the bishop in the teeth of the challenges our diocese faces.

Apart from the social and cultural challenges in establishing sustainable, Christlike churches on these estates and throughout the diocese, there are also enormous and entrenched spiritual hurdles in the culture of a significant number of small and declining parish churches in South Yorkshire.

These issues are around the quality of the Christian message such churches are proclaiming by life and by lip and the evangelistic
welcome or lack of it they are offering.

These challenges cannot be avoided by resorting to the default ‘the Church of England celebrates theological diversity’ position. But to write off the possibility of spiritual renewal in established parish churches in a diocese is surely to write off the grace of God. The signs so far are that, in the cause of Christ’s Kingdom, Sheffield’s new bishop is theologically and spiritually inclined to write large the grace of God in his pastoral leadership of a tough northern diocese.

OUT OF THE OVERFLOW OF THE HEART, THE MOUTH SPEAKS

By God's grace, you can't keep a good man down.

The Christian character of Evangelical musician and songwriter Matt Redman shines through in his back page interview in Friday's Church Times. This despite the quote the sub-editors chose to highlight - 'My biggest regret is not learning to read music'.

There were much better quotes they could have gone for:

'My aim is to remind people that, at a time when so much around us is shaking and failing, Jesus is unchanging and unshakeable.'

'If God has called you to do something, he'll provide the right encouragements and open doors, just at the right time.'

'Our ultimate aim isn't significance; it's obedience.'

'This (his ministry as a worship-songwriter) is not about developing a career or trying to make a mark for your name: it's about serving and following God.'

'I love the writings of Spurgeon - they feel so full of truth, yet so devotional at the same time.'

'As for favourite and least favourite bits of the Bible, we're talking about the inspired word of God here; so I'm not going to go for a disliked part.'

A welcome relief from the arrogant ticking-off God the Holy Spirit implicitly gets from some contributors who are prepared to name the bits they don't like - Old Testament stories and Psalms involving judgement and of course Paul's teaching on male headship and sometimes human sexuality.

Instead of wanting to get locked in a church with Rowan Williams or Desmond Tutu or Gene Robinson, Mr Redman's choices were Isaac Watts, John Newton, Charles Wesley and Fanny Crosby - 'I'd love to hear some great song-writing stories, and learn from them'.

What a humble, inspiring servant of Christ.

OAK HILL AND WYCLIFFE THE TWO DOGS ON THE TRACK

There are two dogs on the track for clearly Reformed Evangelical theological colleges within the Church of England.

Cranmer's Curate is prepared to concede the point following Wycliffe Hall Principal the Revd Dr Richard Turnbull's quite outstanding letter in October's Evangelicals Now.

Your curate had argued that Oak Hill was the only dog on the track for a Reformed Evangelical theological college in his article in July's EN: Reasons for backing the not posh theological college.

Here are some of the golden goals, or creaming cover-drives if your prefer, from Richard's letter:

The evangelical constituency is best served by having two faithful and flourishing Reformed evangelical colleges within the Church of England. To do so permits a greater and wider range of influence for the gospel. Similarly it permits more opportunities for evangelical scholars and a wider range of opportunities for students in mission, teaching and training. Two flourishing colleges also prevent complacency. Wycliffe Hall and Oak Hill need to co-operate as much as possible in policy and advocacy, but the existence of alternatives helps keep those of us responsible for preparing gospel ministers sharp and responsive.

He continued:

The essential accountability of each college is to Christ through its trustee body and trust deed. Surprisingly to some, that even trumps the Ministry Division of the Church of England! However, there is also an essential accountability to the constituency itself. As institutions, it is all too easy to become remote from parish ministry (one good reason for ensuring a high level of parish experience among the staff). The colleges have no divine right to exist. Rather we are to serve the Lord through our task of equipping those called to ministry. It is, therefore, essential that the colleges form deep and meaningful relationships across the constituency to ensure that we are responsive to the ministry needs of those we serve.

He concluded:

Every evangelical church should have within its mission budget support for the evangelical colleges. By all means give to Oak Hill, if that is what your parish desires, or give it to Wycliffe or to both. However, without that support there might be neither a Wycliffe nor an Oak Hill in ten years' time.

Thank you for your support, of Oak Hill and of Wycliffe. Pray for Mike (Ovey, Principal) at Oak Hill, pray also for me.

Richard has won the argument for the time being that the Reformed Evangelical constituency in the Church of England needs both colleges and should be supporting both. Your curate still has two questions.

One for the future: can the trustees of Wycliffe Hall guarantee Reformed Evangelical succession in its principal as effectively as can the Kingham Hill Trust for Oak Hill? Cranmer's Curate sincerely hopes so but nobody has answered that question so far in this debate. There is bound to be pressure to appoint a Fulcrum-ey woman when Richard goes.

Another for the present: is Oxbridge actually a good environment for a theological college? Your curate believes being located in Oxford is a disadvantage for Richard and his team in preparing future ministers for front-line parochial ministry - because it is so rarefied. Nonetheless, this is a disadvantage with which they are contending very well in the cause of effective ministry training.

So thank God for the two dogs - may they both keep running for Christ.

A LESSON FROM BARNSLEY ON MINISTRY STRATEGY

Why are we Conservative Evangelicals so preoccupied with student ministry? The new church plants being launched in various city centres around the country are aiming to attract university students.

Part of the answer is that students would be considered strategic for the gospel. They have an influence out of proportion to their number. It’s about reaching the few in order to reach the many.

York therefore and not Barnsley is the target for a new church plant in Yorkshire. ‘It is a bustling and important town with two large and growing universities...York also has an influence on the country out of proportion to its size largely because of its universities, which are planning on huge expansion over the next few years,’ says the church planter looking to set up a new Evangelical church in York city centre.

But in the interests of the gospel serious questions must be asked about this ‘strategic’ focus on student ministry:

· To what extent are we as Conservative Evangelicals drawn to students because we find them intellectually stimulating? We were university students ourselves, many of us, and they cotton on quickly to the message we are putting across and to the arguments for the truths we are wanting to communicate. There is a buzz about student ministry. We find them easier and quicker to minister to than other social groups.

· To what extent are the many actually being reached through the few? The evidence is that after they graduate converted university students tend to gravitate to the large Evangelical flagships in affluent, fairly socially homogeneous areas. So the trickle-down effect doesn’t seem to be happening in practice in Evangelical circles in the UK.

In the light of these questions, it is encouraging to reflect on the ministry of the 19th century evangelist to China, Barnsley-born Hudson Taylor. He moved out of the Europeanised coastal cities of China, which had been the strategic focus of missionary activity previously. He took the gospel into inland China, adopting Chinese language, dress and manners. The gospel seeds sown by this courageous and risky missionary activity threw roots deep into the soil of China’s hinterland. That meant the toxic influence of Mao and the cultural revolution in the second half of the 20th century was not able to eliminate the Church. It is quite possible that the number of Christians in China now exceeds the entire population of the United Kingdom.

Of course university students need to be reached for Christ. But Taylor provides a theological and historical encouragement to move out of the ‘strategic’ safe havens with a great gospel that is not a sociological phenomenon but a message of salvation for all who believe and trust in Christ.

A CHRISTIAN CASE FOR HOME-SCHOOLING

This excellent guest-post by Cranmer's Webmaster on the case for home-schooling deserves a hearing from the youth group:

Following on from your excellent post entitled “Equality Push creates climate of fear in schools”, I noted your comments regarding Christians opting for home-schooling creating a sub-cultural ghetto.

Although fully sympathetic with this statement, my wife and I have taken (after much consideration) the decision to home-school our 9-year-old son. By way of background, we live in a small rural village and the primary school that our son attended was well-rated in terms of the league tables and generally a good school all round.

Many people in the UK are unaware that although education is compulsory, schooling is not. It's a parent’s legal responsibility to ensure that their children receive an efficient education. Yet this hefty responsibility has been delegated to schools. Education should equip and prepare a child to be an effective member of their community, rather than to educate in the alternative ways or lifestyles of the country as a whole.

Socialisation was another element that predominately featured in our choice to home educate. How could we expect our son to learn good social skills from peers that are socially immature and especially when the behavioural patterns of some children are so undesirable? We also asked ourselves where and when in real life do you actually spend 6.5 hours per day with 30 people all within 9 months of your age range? Only at school – so not really a preparation for real life and the work environment.

As parents we became increasingly concerned in respect of the “type” of information that the schools are forced to teach. On the one hand there is simply a profound denial of any possibility of intelligent design (and the notion of God in general) within the science curricula and a perpetuation of “random” life as a fact. Even the combination of Intelligent Design with evolution is not considered and we found that Richard Dawkins is hijacking education by sneaking atheism into our schools via the vehicle of science – this time through the gift of a free DVD from the British Humanist Association. On the other end of the spectrum, we have found that some of the Americanised Christian science education seems to be based on young earth creationism only. The Government's push on the three R's of reading, writing and 'rithmetic has failed miserably, as more and more children leave the system without these skills, as in all honesty these skills are taught after school, at home by parents. However, we felt that teaching the more useful skills of the modern 3 R's of Reading, Research and Reasoning are more appropriate.

The “Religious Education” that our son received was most certainly anti-Christian. Although they would cover the festivals, this was done in such a way as to ensure that the Gospel was not given and in fact we found that Christianity was specifically mentioned as a religion that had traditionally suppressed the rights of women and that followers “believed” that if they led a “good” life they will go to Heaven. Such error would be forgivable if there was not such an in-depth and rigorous study of other religions in a positive light. The main example that springs to mind is the teaching on Islam as the cause of modern progress, science, mathematics and civilisation.

Primary schools are being forced to progressively take over areas of teaching that should be reserved solely for parents. The Christian Institute just recently revealed that sexual education should include teaching children about sexual pleasure in order to cut teenage pregnancies! This sort of “education” is also being pushed through the UN and the EU and will include children from the age of 5 years and upwards. As identified by many, we know that the “Equality and Diversity” push will make the teaching of deviant sexuality to our children a norm within the classroom.

We have a God-given mandate to raise our children in the way of the Lord and we wanted our son educated in line with our own religious convictions and philosophies, and yet this has become progressively at odds with state education.