Rev: Holding a big mirror up to the Church

The current series of Rev continues, as it should, to provoke debate about the nature of ordained ministry and the state of the Church of England. Informed comment on the series so far can be found here and here.


In the comments to Angus Ritchie's Fulcrum piece, David Runcorn says, Rev "is certainly touching a church and particularly its clergy in a very personal and vulnerable way."


Ritchie and Runcorn have a significant debate about interpretations of 1 Corinthians 1. 25-28, with Ritchie arguing that:


"To focus only on whether we ‘mean well’ is to focus entirely on ourselves.  In a world where people hunger for meaning and hope (and in which increasing numbers at home as well as abroad hunger for food), the Gospel demands more than good intentions.  While we can all smile at Adam Smallbone’s antics, it would be a grave mistake to become sentimental about his ineffectiveness."


and


"It seems clear from St Paul’s own ministry and impact that what means by “God’s foolishness” and his “weakness” is not the kind of ineffectiveness which (I feel) Rev sentimentalises."


While Runcorn responds:


"The character of Adam Smallbone is found in the long honourable religious and dramatic tradition of the ‘fool’. As such he is a sign of contradiction. His vulnerabilities are ours. In his very weakness and clumsiness he is all our dilemmas, larger than life. That’s what fools are for."


and


"I do still wonder just how publically compelling a church that is sheep among wolves, common clay pots, weak and foolish to shame the wise etc can ever look in the midst of a society. There is something in these vocational descriptions that is surely intended to subvert cultural norms of power, status, impressiveness and credibility. There can be a certain attempt to be compelling to the world that is itself corrupting. I don’t see any way round it."


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The Frames - Dance The Devil Back Into His Hole.

Treating the Bible like some vast jigsaw puzzle

Tom Wright wrote an article for the Times in the wake on the Synod decision on Women Bishops which was also posted on the Fulcrum website and aimed to nail the lie that 'people who “believe in the Bible” or who “take it literally” will oppose women’s ordination.' He wrote:

"All Christian ministry begins with the announcement that Jesus has been raised from the dead. And Jesus entrusted that task, first of all, not to Peter, James, or John, but to Mary Magdalene. Part of the point of the new creation launched at Easter was the transformation of roles and vocations: from Jews-only to worldwide, from monoglot to multilingual (think of Pentecost), and from male-only leadership to male and female together.

Within a few decades, Paul was sending greetings to friends including an “apostle” called Junia (Romans xvi, 7). He entrusted that letter to a “deacon” called Phoebe whose work was taking her to Rome. The letter-bearer would normally be the one to read it out to the recipients and explain its contents. The first expositor of Paul’s greatest letter was an ordained travelling businesswoman.

The resurrection of Jesus is the only Christian guide to the question of where history is going. Unlike the ambiguous “progress” of the Enlightenment, it is full of promise — especially the promise of transformed gender roles."

Among the comments made on the Fulcrum website about Wright's article is this: "The meaning of 1 Timothy 2:11-12 is clear - the only question is whether we choose to obey the instruction of the apostle who was appointed by the Lord Jesus Christ to open the eyes of the nations and turn them from darkness to light (Acts 26: 17-18), a teacher of the nations in faith and truth (he speaks the truth in Christ and lies not) (1 Timothy 2: 7)."

Giles Fraser comments in The Guardian today that: 'Conservative religious people are generally locked in a self-referencing worldview where truth is about strict internal coherence rather than any reaching out to reality. That's why they treat the Bible like some vast jigsaw – its truth residing in a complex process of making the pieces fit together and not with the picture it creates.'

So, St Paul sent greetings to friends including an “apostle” called Junia and entrusted that letter to a “deacon” called Phoebe.  He clearly accepted women in his ministry teams and among the leadership of the churches with which he worked. Yet on other occasions and in different circumstances and contexts he made statements such as that in 1 Timothy 2. 11-12. 

To take the Bible seriously surely means to live with the tension of the different and sometimes contradictory statements and actions found within the Bible, both taken as a whole and in relation to its key protagonists instead of trying to 'treat the Bible like some vast jigsaw – its truth residing in a complex process of making the pieces fit together and not with the picture it creates.' To my mind that also includes taking context, both then and now, into account in seeking to understand what God was saying and doing, both then and now, and not simply insisting that particular statements originally made for particular contexts and times necessarily have literal validity for all times and contexts.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lone Justice - Don't Toss Us Away.

Modern day Donatism

Just a quick post to say that I share Tim Goodbody's frustration with the people at Anglican Mainstream who seem to be encouraging others to move donations from Tear Fund because Desmond Tutu spoke at a recent conference and because long-term Tear Fund supporter Cliff Richard has spoken publicly recently in favour of same-sex relationships.

Tim has a very good post on the topic which can be found here. As he says there, "it's just modern day Donatism - not wanting to be "tainted" by association." Further comment on the Fulcrum website can be found here.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Carly Simon - You're So Vain.

Services after Civil Partnerships

This comes from today's Ekklesia mailing:

"A paper published at the weekend suggests that under the laws of the Church of England clergy have far greater liberty in relationship to services following civil partnerships than has previously been thought.

It comes after a "marriage" of two gay priests, who were already in a civil partnership, was held at a London church, causing controversy and heated debate."

Having looked at this useful paper by Brian Lewis on the Inclusive Church website, I've also noted the link to the open correspondence between Andrew Goddard and Giles Goddard which seems to provide a good introduction to the current debates on the issue of homosexuality.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tracy Chapman - All That You Have Is Your Soul.