Challenge today

"For the church today the challenge is to find a way of focusing our attention outside the institution and to resist the temptation to become preoccupied with the insistent internal demands for more money, new roofs, more clergy, more children in the Sunday school and more young families in the pews." Ann Morisy (Journeying Out, 2006, p3)
Discuss...

Saint Matthew

Sermon on St Matthew’s Day

Reading: Matthew 9: 9 – 13

The day Matthew the tax-collector joined Jesus was a great day for the movement which
became the church ; and today we celebrate Matthew’s witness. To Matthew is attributed
one of the four gospels with so much of the sayings and teachings of Jesus about the
kingdom of God . Though we don’t know much about Matthew, we can celebrate that here is
a man who turned his life around and followed Jesus, who listened to the teaching of Jesus
and believed in Jesus; and; who passed on those life-giving words of Jesus to succeeding
generations.

Tax-collectors like Matthew were a despicable crew as far as most people of Israel were
concerned. They fleeced the hard-working locals and the proceeds financed the extravagant
life-styles of the elite in the imperial Roman regime. Little cogs in the empire’s economic
machine, still they were sure enough to make money out of it for themselves; and so in local
terms they were pretty wealthy. There’s a hint of Matthew’s superior life-style in the word used
to describe how they sat at dinner – it means “reclined”; which was a Greek and Roman
custom followed also by wealthy Jews.

But Jesus spent time with these “tax-collectors and sinners”. He did not condemn them like
the Pharisees did. He went to their parties; he ate their food, bought no doubt with the money
they had extracted from hard-working families. But what was even worse in the eyes of the
Pharisees – he ate and drank with people who were religiously unclean. The nature of the
tax-collectors role meant that to do business they had to break the strict Pharisaic
interpretations of the laws on uncleanness and observing the Sabbath. To eat at the same
table with people who were outside the Law was to defile yourself also.

The Pharisees’ disgust with tax-collectors was probably intensified by their partly
unconscious realisation they had something in common; they too were collaborators with the
pagan Roman imperial power. Like the tax-collectors the Pharisees had made a pragmatic
adaptation to that overwhelming regime which to defy was to invite destruction. Whilst the
tax-collectors’ tactic for survival in the Empire was to get a job with them and make some
money; the Pharisees’ method was to retreat into rigorous religious observance. Jesus saw
through the hypocrisy of the Pharisees and that’s why they disliked him so much. Though tax-
collectors like Matthew were self-regarding and uncaring of their neighbours’ plight, they
didn’t pretend to be piously superior. So Jesus condemned the Pharisees for the way they
covered their self-serving survival tactics with a cloak of outward piety whilst all the while they
cared equally little for the hopeless suffering of the ordinary people of Israel.

If tax-collectors were to be condemned it wasn’t for what the Pharisees condemned them for
– their failure to keep the religious observances – instead it was for the harm they were doing
to their neighbours and to themselves by working for the empire of Rome instead of working
for the kingdom of God; choosing to be the slaves of a deadly machine instead of claiming the
freedom of God’s promises.

So why didn’t Jesus condemn the tax-collectors and sinners? Why did he go to their parties?
It’s not that difficult to appreciate why the Lord gave attention to the poor, the sick, the lame
and the weak of his society – they needed the special care of God. But it’s a lot harder to
understand why he’d want to fraternise with tax-collectors. Imagine how you’d feel if you
heard that one of our bishops went to parties given by a well-known editor of pornographic
magazines, or an infamous loan shark? Not just once but quite a few times. It’s fishy isn’t it?

And this was the question the Pharisees put. Why did Jesus eat with these people? The
answer Jesus gave them shows that there is more to this than being accepted or condemned
according to compliance with standards, even moral standards. For Jesus uses the picture of
disease and sickness which needs healing. The sick person needs the help of a doctor if he is
to recover; not the condemnation of a judge. And so the picture is given here of a different
kind of community - which reaches out inclusively to help and heal even those who are doing
it harm. I desire mercy not sacrifice is a quotation from the prophet Hosea in the Old
Testament. Mercy in the Hebrew sits closer in meaning to compassion than our word
suggests. If our hearts are in the right place there is no need to waste time and energy
needlessly assuring ourselves of God’s love for us because we have that assurance from
God; rather true religion is about showing compassion for others who are in need of healing
and help.

Jesus invited Matthew to follow him and he did – he took that decision to begin again with his
life and to learn from Jesus and to serve Jesus. Matthew had caught a glimpse of the love
and compassion of God and it aroused his belief that there was hope for a better way of life.
The empire of the Romans was not the only world there was to live in ; there was hope of a
new world. He chose to stop working for the Roman empire and dedicate his life and his
energies to working for God’s kingdom to come on earth; which as the gospel which bears his
name spells out, the Lord taught us to pray for every day.

It’s salutary to remember St Matthew at this point in our country's history when the human
capacity for self-delusion; our failure to recognise limits in our economic systems, our failure
to remember that money should serve human life not the other way round; has been revealed
all too dramatically in the near collapse of the banking system three years ago and a major
economic downturn - with all the pain and suffering that has been causing in people’s
everyday lives. There is a lot to condemn in the combination of greed and fear which drives
our global economy – our lack of respect for God’s creation; our failure to share prosperity
more equitably; and care more comprehensively for the truly needy in our world. There is no
shortage of people who see the world and live their lives in a way similar to how Matthew
was before he believed in Jesus. How should our response to those who might be held
responsible for economic chaos be modelled on the way of Christ I wonder?

Matthew rejected the selfish pursuit of gain because he came to believe in Jesus who offered
the hope of a better way – not just in heaven when we die, but a better way to live on earth
believing God’s presence and power is very near and working to reveal and demonstrate
God’s economy for our world. Can we be like Matthew?

Revd Canon David Hodgson

What's crazy about believing in God?

Believing in God is bonkers - that's pretty much the default attitude towards religion in popular metropolitan culture in the UK today. More people are out and proud to be self-declared atheists than ever before, and quite a lot of atheists make a point of ridiculing belief in God as often as they can. A range of belittling jibes are deployed by militant atheists: religionists are deluded, infantile, unthinking, ignorant,emotionally stunted, psychologically malformed,stuck in a time warp, fearful of reality - one or all of these. We get the idea!

There are no ideas in militant atheism's ..er...critique of faith in God that have not been around since the late nineteenth century in one shape or another. Sometimes,in good old common-sense pragmatic Britain atheism presents itself as opposing the alleged irrationality of believing something for which there's no scientific evidence. But more deeply it's also about the apparent impossibility of squaring the total blindness and neutrality over morals and values in natural life with the belief that there is a good, loving and just Mind or Spirit who is ultimately responsible for everything that has been, is, or ever will be.

There are well-worn pathways in philosophical theology in response to these issues, of varying degrees of sophistication, which it'd take a lot more than a short blog to map and explore. I'm interested to muse on why atheism has become so much more common and especially why more militant in recent years. Maybe it's been the slow-burn influence of various episodes of religious craziness - like the mass suicide of Jonestown Guyana in 1978 and other cult-related events in the 1990s - finally galvanised by the alleged theological motivations for the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center in 2001.

What seems to have motivated the founder of a recent atheist bus advertising campaign, which urged people to relax and enjoy their lives because there's probably no God, was the negative reaction induced in her by religious posters. The ones that tell people they'll go to hell if they don't believe in God were the main culprits.

So probably the current cultural phenomenon of active atheism is a sort of equal and opposite reaction to those Christians groups suffering spiritual paranoia who sadly find it necessary to boost their faith by threatening others who don't share it.

Meanwhile it seems to me that believing in God is the least bonkers way of life anyone can choose and the most rational. In the spirit of French philosopher Blaise Pascal - consider the alternatives. Either God is or God is not. If God is not, still there is no harm in living as if God is, because the values of love, truth and goodness which are promoted by a sincere and selfless faith in God are ultimately better for us and our communities than other values, and faith will motivate us to sustain them against all odds. In that case, when we die we will know no different; but if God is, then the good life we have lived will be rewarded with ultimate bliss and fulfilment. That is the wager of faith a la Pascal as I understand it.

But there is a further thought for me. It's the emergence in this universe of ourselves as beings with consciousnesses capable of appreciating love, truth and goodness and valuing them, which is what persuades me it's not crazy to believe in God. And for me even if God is not now in one sense , the direction of travel for consciousness in this universe is that surely God will be, and a God who will be, cannot help but be a God who always was and now is. This seems to me much less bonkers and a much more creative and life-giving way to go than the atheism which sees only "change and decay all around".

Sorry Rowan I don't agree with you

To illustrate my view on the proposed Anglican Covenant I simply quote these words from Anglican blogger Jared Cramer in his analysis of the flaws in Archbishop Rowan's response to the recent General Convention of the US Episcopal Church:

" I believe the fundamental problem with ++Rowan’s perspective is the idea that “the present structures” have “safeguarded our unity.” Rowan’s faith is in structures to safeguard the church. We should give greater muscles to the Instruments of Unity, or we should sign on to an agreed upon statement and Covenant. If we work hard enough on these structures, they will keep us in community with one another.

The problem is that community is not the sort of thing that will be enforced by structures. Rather, our unity as Christians is safeguarded by a set of Christ-like practices, by an attitude of meekness and humility. To wit, we are safeguarded by being more Christ like. If all within the church began to truly discern the body, to see the grave harm that comes whenever one part says to another, “I have no need of you,” then our unity would be strengthened. If all within the church saw the need for respecting the conscience and study of their brothers and sisters, trusting the Spirit to guide us into all truth, then our unity would be strengthened.

This is what has safeguarded the church, this is what will continue to safeguard the church: grounding our lives in the self-giving glory of God in Christ, shaping our lives after the Gospel, looking to recognize the gifts of those pushed to the edges and finding our own lives transformed by their witness. Structures will come in go, a lifestyle and attitude shaped by Christ will safeguard the church until God draws all things to Godself. I fear sometimes that ++Rowan and the broader church have forgotten that. I pray that we will all remember."
"

Queen gets it right on FCA

There's been criticism by gay rights defenders of the Queen's message of good wishes to the newly-formed Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (FCA) meeting in London this week. And some Anglicans too might feel dismayed that the Governor of the Church of England appears to be endorsing a breakaway group. But I think the Queen has pulled off a rather wonderful diplomatic coup. By sending this message she's neutralising the threat and danger this group might be perceived to present to the rest of the Church. Here is yet another grouping in the wonderful diversity of the broad river of Anglicanism alongside all the others like Forward in Faith, Affirming Catholicism, or Affirming Liberalism.

It's like a loving mother who quietly and persistently affirms her enduring compassion for her rebellious teenage son even though he says the most horrible things about his family of origin all the while continuing to crave his mother's love. After all FCA appears to sought an endorsement from the Queen.

There's no doubt the FCA are saying "horrible" things about its family of origin, the Church of England and the wider Anglican Communion. Though it's opinions are profoundly false and widely regarded as such by the majority of members of the Church of England, the difficulty the FCA presents is that it regards itself as the true bearers of apostolic Christianity in the Anglican tradition and the rest of us, who do not share its particular interpretations, as apostate. This is a tricky situation because some of the opinions the FCA hold, such as its rejection of homosexual love, were previously held by the whole Church as self-evident interpretations of the biblical tradition. And still are by many Anglicans the world over.

This is a re-visiting of contests which were fought at the beginning of the Church of England in the late sixteenth century; about whether all the laws of Scripture are binding on the Church and Christians, or whether there is an essential core of revealed laws which are necessary to be followed for salvation, whilst many other issues of Christian practice and church order are matters to be decided by the mind of the Christian community. Since the magisterial work of Richard Hooker (Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity 8 vols c 1600)the mainstream position of the Church of England has been the latter view.

The FCA and similar groupings argue that those Anglicans who have revised the earlier position of the Church on homosexuality and the role of women in the ordained ministry have allowed the truths of the faith to be captured by secular cultural beliefs. In reality, the reverse is the case. Repression of homosexuality and the prescription of roles based on gender are cultural expressions which were elevated wrongly though understandably to the status of gospel truth; and are now being abandoned by many Anglicans who recognise this.

The Queen's tactic is a re-assertion of the mainstream Anglican tradition; that there are many secondary issues upon which Anglicans may disagree as times change, but that does not mean we must vilify one another as apostates and heretics, or still less ignore one another either. This is the genius of the Anglican Spirit. We must not lose it. And St Paul appears to have given it a good start when he wrote in his Letter to the Romans:

"Why do you pass judgement on your brother or sister?Or you, why do you despise your brother or sister?" (Rom 14: 10)

Holding Together: Gospel, Church and Spirit by Christopher Cocksworth

Holding Together: Gospel,Church and Spirit-the essentials of Christian indentity: Gospel, Church and Spirit - The Essentials of Christian Identity by Christopher J. Cocksworth

My review

rating: 2 of 5 stars
This book has an admirable intention. It tries to show that the Scripture, the Church and the Spirit are essential elements of being Christian which all churches must hold together if they are to be true to the core of Christianity. It is aimed especially at the evangelical wing of the church, but it also has challenging things to say to the Catholic wing especially about the place of Scripture.



There are very compelling arguments made , based on biblical and early church evidence. The works of the Protestant Reformers, such as Luther and Calvin are quoted too; and the principal source of evidence for an evangelical appreciation of the Eucharist is the work of John and Charles Wesley.



There is a very good chapter on the role of Mary in Christian spirituality. Whilst it may not persuade convinced believers in the Bodily Assumption or the Immaculate Conception to moderate their adherence to these dogmas; it may persuade evangelicals that they need to give fresh attention to Mary.



The large gap in the book is its failure to bridge the bigger yawning gulf in the Church, which is between the liberals or progressives and the conservatives, be they catholic , evangelical or charismatic. Liberal Christians will definitely be disappointed in this book if they had looked for fresh thinking on how to hold together with conservatives. Barack Obama might have more to offer them on this topic than this book.



Evangelicals and Catholics who are both in their own ways traditional in orientation have lived together in the same house in the Church of England like an old married couple whose love for each other has declined, but have decided its too expensive to get divorced. There are occasional , and sometimes fierce spats over territory, but on the whole they rub along without talking to each other more than they need to. Cocksworth's commendable hope is that they might learn to love one another again, and bring the house back to life.



The fierce arguments however are in the wider Anglican Communion, and especially within the United States, over how binding on the future church are traditional conceptions of Christian identity, personal and communal. So there are conflicts over homosexuality and gender issues.

I don't recall a single reference to homosexuality or women bishops in this book.



Finally the biggest difficulty with the book is its style. It is a very tough read. It can no more be digested in one sitting than a whole Christmas pudding!There is little to lighten the dense concentration of facts and arguments. It might be said that there are ten books in one here. Too much of the prose exposes its origins in theological college lecture or sermon. There is little likelihood that the book will be persevered with by those who might need to hear its message. It could be a useful source for Anglican ordinands in training; though the lack of a subject index limits this.


View all my reviews.

Bus slogan generator

Bus slogan generator

An odd god not to believe in

Have you travelled on an “atheist bus” yet? This is the
campaign, initiated by journalist Ariane Sherine and backed
by Richard Dawkins and the British Humanist Association, to
place posters on buses which say “There is probably no God.
Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.” I haven’t been on one
yet and I’m not sure how I’d feel about it if I had to! The official responses of church leaders seem pretty relaxed though, even welcoming to the campaign, because when people see these posters it will make them think about the most important question in life. The word “probably” is the key. As one commentator pointed out: this is more unsettling to an agnostic than saying nothing at all – rather like saying to your spouse as the plane leaves the ground for your summer holiday “I probably locked the front door, so stop worrying and enjoy your holiday”!
I’m interested by the second sentence. The idea seems to be that since there is no God you can stop worrying and enjoy life. I’m enjoying the irony in that. “Stop worrying and enjoy life” is a fair summary of the message of Jesus! No need I’m sure for me to give you the gospel quotes here. What do you think?

Jonathan Bailey

I was sad when I read yesterday in the Church Times that Jonathan Bailey has died. He was only 69 years old. Jonathan was latterly Bishop of Derby. I worked with him when he was Archdeacon of Southend in the Diocese of Chelmsford and I was Industrial Chaplain for Harlow from 1989 until 1997; though Jonathan was appointed to a suffragan bishopric in another diocese before I left Essex. One of his roles as Archdeacon was to lead the team of Industrial Missioners, or Chaplains, in Essex, known collectively as ECCIC- Essex Churches' Council for Industry and Commerce. It was an ecumenical team, though Anglicans predominated; and the Roman Catholic contribution was more often in moral, and some financial, support rather than in the shape of personnel. Jonathan's skill, and warmth, as a team leader of a diverse team gave me a role model whom I could watch and learn from important lessons about leadership and team motivation. The monthly ECCIC meetings led by Jonathan were the most fruitful and stimulating meetings of clergy working together on a common purpose that I have ever been involved with in my ministry to date. Jonathan's death undoubtedly deprives the "Church in earth" of a wise and compassionate counsellor and teacher; but hopefully I, and others who sat at his feet, will practice and propogate those good things which we learned from him.

Archbishop urges EU to build a greener economy now

I am delighted to learn today that the Archbishop of Canterbury has joined with the heads of the Church of Sweden and the Protestant Church in Germany and written a letter to Sarkozy, as President of the Council of the European Union, ahead of the EU summit tomorrow urging him to ensure that climate action is not sidelined because of the current economic crisis. The full text of the letter can be read on the title link above from the Archbishop's website. Here are some quotes from the press release.

Dr Rowan Williams, Archbishop Anders Wejryd and Bishop Huber express their concern that some governments are looking to increase their allowance of carbon credits that can be bought from developing countries, rather than looking at how to decrease carbon output from within the EU. Instead, the Church leaders call for governments in the EU to take a more holistic approach to economic growth:

"The challenge of resuscitating economic growth cannot be treated in isolation from the challenges of promoting sustainable development. The choice is not between economic growth and environmental protection. .... Our economic and environmental fortunes are inextricably linked. Working sustainably for the global common good and respecting the integrity of God's creation are not alternatives – they are one and the same. To think and act otherwise is neither 'common' nor 'good'."

The Church leaders also advocate the EU taking the opportunity of the economic downturn to build up a new, greener, economy:

"The current financial crisis and economic recession represent less a threat and more an historic opportunity to bring about tomorrow's low carbon economy today. We are encouraged that US President-elect Barack Obama has responded to this challenge by pledging to invest $75 billion to create 5 million new 'green collar' jobs by 2020 as part of a wider package of measures on climate change. Although this pledge has yet to be realised, Europe's leaders must not retreat from taking similar action."

The Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary

Today is one of the festivals of Mary in the churches of both the East and the West - in honour of her conception. Christians remember the starting point of Mary's earthly existence; those first cells that became the human person of the mother of Jesus; and so today the Church is celebrating the very stirrings of God's plan to restore the world.

Without Mary there is no Jesus. This is true not only at the biological level but also at the spiritual - it is Mary's graciousness which the Church also celebrates; in response to God's grace, Mary consented.

But the biology is vital.St Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury around 1100,quoted in Celebrating the Saints: Daily Spiritual Readings from the Calendar of the Church of England compiled by Robert Atwell, reflects in an ecological way about how Mary's role as the mother of the incarnation of God restores all creation - "sky, stars, earth, rivers, day and night and all things that are meant to serve us and be for our good" - the whole of nature rejoices to see God choosing to partner with them - though the biological process of conception and birth - in order to restore his creation.
"God himself, who made all things, remade himself from Mary. In this way he remade all that he had made. He who was able to make all things out of nothing,when they had been defaced would not remake them without Mary's help".

As well the astonishing boldness of the assertions which Anselm made about the salvific significance of Mary - which Protestant Chistians find difficult to acccept - what interests me today is the quite natural way in which Anselm incorporated a creation-focussed perspective into his reflections on Mary's role.
Here is a glimpse of the intellectual and spiritual matrix which lies behind the fantastic images of animals and birds to be found carved and painted on the walls of so many of cathedrals and churches of Europe, founded or rebuilt, around the time of Anselm.

Most of us would let a comparatively minor festival of the Church pass by without even a thought for its ecological significance. But if we took Anselm's approach and focussed on the creation message, wouldn't this transform our spirituality and liturgy; putting our contemporary ecological imperative right at the heart of the way we live and proclaim Christian faith?

May God bless you with...

I was struck by this prayer offered by the Presiding Bishop of the (US)Episcopal Church at the recent service in New York on the occasion of the UN Extraordinary meeting to review urgently progress on the millennium Development Goals:

May God bless you with discomfort,
At easy answers, half-truths, and superficial relationships,
So that you may live deep within your heart.

May God bless you with anger,
At injustice, oppression, and exploitation of people,
So that you may work for justice, freedom, and peace.

May God bless you with tears,
To shed for those who suffer from pain,
rejection, starvation, and war,
So that you may reach out your hand to comfort them
and turn their pain to joy.

And may God bless you with enough foolishness,
To believe that you can make a difference in this world,
So that you can do what others claim cannot be done.

Amen.

Source: Anglican Communion News Service

Evolution and Christianity

The recent mailing to parishes from the Diocese of Oxford contained information about the Evolution Sunday movement. I'd not heard of this before. It originated in the USA and is one way of demonstrating that Christianity and science can co-exist peacefully. There is an informative website here.

Women bishops vote a triumph for common sense and justice

The vote in General Synod to allow women to be ordained bishops is a triumph of common sense and the true spirit of Anglicanism. The Guardian editorial piece makes the point well, that eventually the will of the majority to do what is right cannot always be thwarted by the minority, however sincere its beliefs.

Three cheers for Will Hutton

Will Hutton offers an eloquent defence of the liberal Anglican tradition and why it's important to sustain it. He must be one of the few journalists who are defending and appreciating Rowan Williams at the moment.

Scotland is another country

They do things differently in Scotland. Here is the Bishop of Edinburgh's address to his Diocesan Synod on the conflict engrossing the Anglican Communion. It goes deeper. Who in England has ever heard a bishop inviting his Synod to consider the difference between God's ontological transcendence and God's epistemological transcendence? The Church of England paddles in the shallows too often. Afraid of being accused of intellectualism. But the deep issues and paradoxes of human existence are presented more subtly in provincial theatres any night of the week than they are in most English Diocesan Synod meetings sadly.

Church and gay question

May the Church gives its blessing to homosexual partnerships and remain true to the will of God? Still be faithful in its witness to the love of God as shown in Jesus and revealed in the Bible?

As a minimum it seems to me this is an open question. That is, even if you are reluctant to give a definitive “yes” in answer, then neither can you give a definitive “no”. The reasons for this I explain below.

If it is an open question, then isn’t the only proper response of all Christians who take seriously the ethic of love for neighbour, especially bishops and church leaders, compassion and respect between those with differing answers? For me this means learning from and listening to others; accepting, not condemning, those who in good faith and conscience want to go ahead and affirm homosexual relationships; as well as those who, also in good faith, genuinely believe this can never be an option for a faithful Church.

This much might be agreed by all Christians who have not allowed their party-line allegiances to cloud their spiritual discernment. But can it be shown that this is an open question?

I have several reasons why I think it is.

Firstly, “facts on the ground”. Clearly there are many Christians, homosexual and not, who already believe that homosexual partnerships may be good and right in the sight of God. But these may be false teachers. The New Testament itself warns against those who will lead the Church astray with spurious beliefs. But the errors the New Testament speaks of are central points of faith such as the adequacy of God’s grace in Christ. We are also taught that by their fruits you shall know them. Where there are Christian men and women who are faithful members of the Church and who clearly reveal in their lives the fruits of God’s grace through faith in Jesus Christ and differ from Christian brothers and sisters in no other way than that they answer “yes” to our question then how can they be regarded as false teachers?

Secondly, our greater knowledge of the human condition. The findings of various branches of science and the personal experiences of many people suggests very strongly that homosexuality is a given feature of human life.

Thirdly, the development of understanding of the biblical texts. Whilst it may be clear that there is very little in the biblical tradition to support a positive assessment of homosexual partnerships, and much to endorse the traditional Christian antipathy, it is not clear that the biblical material should be determinative of a developed Christian ethic for the 21st century.

Fourthly, the development of positive aspects of sexual ethics in public life. Many religiously motivated critics of homosexual partnership consider it to be part of a wider decline in sexual mores in Western society. But this ignores the evidence for many positive changes in relation to more traditional cultures. Modern intolerance of rape, of domestic violence, of child abuse and of forced marriages shows that the so-called decadence of Western societies actually displays many strongly moral developments in recent decades.

Therefore in my view there is no case for condemnation on religious grounds of those who believe sincerely that homosexual partnerships may be a faithful Christian expression of human love and companionship

Church of England bishops concerned over the quality of the clergy

This item in the Daily Telegraph decribes the content of a report from the Church of England House of Bishops expressing concern over the quality of the Church of England clergy. On the one hand, there is concern over the abilities of new entrants to work in a professional and competent way with teams of skilled lay volunteers and colleagues; and on the other, that too many experienced older clergy have lost their enthusiasm for the role.

These are valid concerns and there are some welcome suggestions of a strategy for how things might be improved going forward. At the same time, it needs to be recognised that the stresses upon parish clergy in the Church of England go wider and deeper than pay, pensions and housing; though these are important. Oversight and support from the wider church structures are patchy at best, because resources are over-stretched; the cultural and social standing of Christian clergy has been significantly diminished in the last quarter century; and the sheer quantity of demands upon clergy to introduce and manage change have outstripped the resources available to them to achieve these tasks effectively. Just one example - the introduction of IT has challenged older clergy who have had to find ways from their own resources of catching up in practical and administrative matters. The list of issues and challenges parish clergy have needed to cope with in recent years , largely relying on their own time and initiative, is very long indeed. Older clergy who happen to have lower levels of physical and psychological resilience will have found it very difficult to make up their skills deficits given the general lack of support.
Mention these points to diocesan training depratments and quite often some officers will complain that clergy are offered training and consultancy but don't take it up. However, this misses the point. De-motivated or over-strectched clergy are not just going to pick up the phone and book themselves on training courses as soon as the latest mailing arrives from the diocesan office. More likely than not they won't see the notice in time to do anything about it anyway, because it wil have been buried in their inbox , possibly unopened, for a week or few.
In his strident book about the Church of England, Last Rites: The End of the Church of England, Michael Hampson is bitter, understandably given the church's attitude towards his sexuality I guess; but nonetheless telling points are made. One that sticks in my mind is his insight that in the Church of England the congregations are irrelevant and the parish clergy are almost irrelevant in terms of power. All the power comes down hierarchically from the Crown and is almost totally vested in the bishops.

Scripture Reason and Tradition Puppet Show

Here's a fun video to explain why Scripture alone is not enough, even if necessary, for us to hear what God is saying to us now. Thanks to Father Sam Rose for this Read his blog here

Archbishop Rowan furore

Poking fun at vicars has a long history in English culture,even before Jane Austen introduced us to Mr Collins in Pride and Prejudice! And the figure of the turbulent priest is even older, since Henry II called to be rid of this “turbulent priest”, Thomas a Becket, with deadly results. So there is plenty of material for media editors to mine if they want to target a hapless senior cleric.

Clearly there are some people who are very hostile towards Archbishop Rowan Williams and they are not reluctant to take any opportunity to undermine him. The number within the Church of England of those who wish to see him resign is tiny, and the media coverage they receive is totally disproportionate. Outside the church though it seems there is a significant number who want to make him look irrelevant. Is this part of the general hostility there is to religion amongst some leading voices of our society? Is it a fearful ambivalence of attitude about the power of faith to provide a strong moral vision. I don't believe there is a conspiracy but I don't forget the power of “groupthink” to influence attitudes.

Politicians, both local and national,more and more look to faith groups like local churches to help build sustainable and cohesive communities, as the welfare state continues its long withdrawal. But meaningful partnership involves mutual respect for each other's views.

Politicians and other leading voices who care about more than their own families' fortunes, and there are still some who do, need to ensure that the Archbishop is offered at least the respect for his ideas due to him as the leader of the largest and most deeply embedded voluntary organisation in the country.