A great topic–“Speaking the Truth in Love:The Church and the Challenge of the New Morality”
You may find the list of speakers there and the conference schedule here.
Run, don’t walk, to register for the 2024 Mere Anglicanism Conference! We have an incredible lineup of speakers: D.A. Carson, John Dickson, @RebeccMcLaugh, @amyorrewing, Vaughan Roberts, @calvinrobinson, and Carl Trueman, and more! Register and learn more https://t.co/HMhInevD1D!
— Constantine (@SinnerSaved45) July 26, 2023
Advanced artificial intelligence models can be trained to deceive humans and other AI, a new study has found.
Researchers at AI startup Anthropic tested whether chatbots with human-level proficiency, such as its Claude system or OpenAI’s ChatGPT, could learn to lie in order to trick people.
They found that not only could they lie, but once the deceptive behaviour was learnt it was impossible to reverse using current AI safety measures.
AI can easily be trained to lie – and it can’t be fixed, study says
https://t.co/r5rx8DNJUA— Brendan Tierney (@brendantierney) January 15, 2024
I also came to see that liberalism’s superficial optimism concerning human nature caused it to overlook the fact that reason is darkened by sin. The more I thought about human nature the more I saw how our tragic inclination for sin causes us to use our minds to rationalize our actions. Liberalism failed to see that reason by itself is little more than an instrument to justify man’s defensive ways of thinking. Reason, devoid of the purifying power of faith, can never free itself from distortions and rationalizations.
In spite of the fact that I had to reject some aspects of liberalism, I never came to an all-out acceptance of neo-orthodoxy. While I saw neo-orthodoxy as a helpful corrective for a liberalism that had become all too sentimental, I never felt that it provided an adequate answer to the basic questions. If liberalism was too optimistic concerning human nature, neo-orthodoxy was too pessimistic. Not only on the question of man but also on other vital issues, neo-orthodoxy went too far in its revolt. In its attempt to preserve the transcendence of God, which had been neglected by liberalism’s overstress of his immanence, neo-orthodoxy went to the extreme of stressing a God who was hidden, unknown and “wholly other.” In its revolt against liberalism’s overemphasis on the power of reason, neo-orthodoxy fell into a mood of antirationalism and semifundamentalism, stressing a narrow, uncritical biblicism. This approach, I felt, was inadequate both for the church and for personal life.
So although liberalism left me unsatisfied on the question of the nature of man, I found no refuge in neo-orthodoxy. I am now convinced that the truth about man is found neither in liberalism nor in neo-orthodoxy. Each represents a partial truth. A large segment of Protestant liberalism defined man only in terms of his essential nature, his capacity for good. Neo-orthodoxy tended to define man only in terms of his existential nature, his capacity for evil. An adequate understanding of man is found neither in the thesis of liberalism nor in the antithesis of neo-orthodoxy, but in a synthesis which reconciles the truths of both.
“Every step toward the goal of justice requires sacrifice, suffering, and struggle; the tireless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals.” #MLK #MLKDay2024 #MLKDay #MLK95 #ShiftTheCulture pic.twitter.com/F6UhkDNqcI
— Be A King (@BerniceKing) January 15, 2024
10. What statement about friendship can be more sublime, more true, more valuable than this: it has been proved that friendship must begin in Christ, continue with Christ, and be perfected by Christ. Come, now: propose what in your opinion should be the first question about friendship.
IVO. I think we should first discuss what friendship is, lest we appear to be painting on a void, not knowing what should guide and organize our talk.
11. AELRED. Is Cicero’s definition not an adequate beginningfor you? “Friendship is agreement in things human and divine, with good will and charity.”
12. IVO. If his definition suffices for you, it’s good enough for me.
–Aelred of Rievaulx Spiritual Friendship I.10-12 (Lawrence C. Braceland, tr., Marsha L. Dutton ed., Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press, 2010), p.57
Aelred of Hexham, Abbot of Rievaulx, 1167 pic.twitter.com/JvFmCfvhrR
— Tewkesbury Abbey (@TewkesAbbey) January 12, 2024
After all, it’s not every day a large and wealthy entourage from Persia arrives unannounced, refers to Messianic prophecies, points to an astrological sign, and asks directions so that they might worship the new king of a people who had been without a monarch for more than five centuries. It was an extraordinary event, and the whole city of Jerusalem knew about it. And it seems that not one soul from Jerusalem went with them.
This is astonishing. So why didn’t the local religious leaders send a delegation along with the Magi? There are, of course, various hypotheses. While it is possible that they simply found the claims of the Magi to be too fantastic to merit serious consideration, many observers believe their reluctance is far from innocent. The interpretation that appears most often in sermons and commentaries is that, despite their impressive knowledge of Scriptures, they lacked the faith exhibited by the Persian wise men. While there may be truth in that view, it is a rather shallow explanation. Another bit of conventional wisdom is that the religious leaders were self-assured in their knowledge and did not want to give credence to the claims of foreign visitors whose Babylonian traditions were out of step with the authorities in Jerusalem. While this is certainly a more satisfactory explanation, I think it only captures part of the story.
Another reason the religious leaders chose not to send a delegation to Bethlehem was because doing so would be risky. They probably feared retaliation from Herod, a ruthless leader who was paranoid about losing power. He was infamous for executing his wife, several sons and other relatives, and Jewish leaders whom he perceived as a threat. Sending a delegation to Bethlehem would have suggested they were open to the claims of a rival king and made them vulnerable to charges of disloyalty and treason.
But both the political context and the text itself seem to indicate that fear of death was not the only reason for their reluctance. I believe that the religious and political context suggests that the religious leaders made a more calculated decision to protect their own ambitions and political power.
The Politics of Epiphany https://t.co/kIg6Nn0LV3
— Public Discourse (@PublicDiscourse) December 26, 2023
..[Jesus of Nazareth] was not a kind of demon pretending to be human; he was in every respect a genuine living man. He was not merely a man so good as to be “like God”–he was God.
Now, this is not just a pious commonplace: it is not a commonplace at all. For what it means is this, among other things: that for whatever reason God chose to make man as he is limited and suffering and subject to sorrows and death he [God] had the honesty and courage to take his own medicine. Whatever game he is playing with his creation, he has kept his own rules and played fair. He can exact nothing from man that he has not exacted from himself. He has himself gone through the whole of human experience, from the trivial irritations of family life and the cramping restrictions of hard work and lack of money to the worst horrors of pain and humiliation, defeat, despair, and death. When he was a man, he played the man. He was born in poverty and died in disgrace and thought it well worthwhile.
—Creed or Chaos? (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company,1949), page 4 (with special thanks to blog reader and friend WW)
Today's pick: Rembrandt Harmensz. van Rijn: The Holy Family with Angels https://t.co/nLizVvCuFK pic.twitter.com/Ii15mIg8gN
— Art and the Bible (@artbible) January 1, 2024
My own feeling is that writers who see by the light of their Christian faith will have, in these times, the sharpest eyes for the grotesque, for the perverse, and for the unacceptable. In some cases, these writers may be unconsciously infected with the Manichaean spirit of the times and suffer the much-discussed disjunction between sensibility and belief, but I think that more often the reason for this attention to the perverse is the difference between their beliefs and the beliefs of their audience. Redemption is meaningless unless there is case for it in the actual life we live, and for the last few centuries there has been operating in our culture the secular belief that there is no such cause.
The novelist with Christian concerns will find in modern life distortions which are repugnant to him, and his problem will be to make these appear as distortions to an audience which is used to seeing them as natural; and he may well be forced to take ever more violent means to get his vision across to this hostile audience. When you can assume that your audience holds the same beliefs as you do, you can relax a little and use more normal means of talking to it; when you have to assume that it does not, then you have to make your vision apparent by shock, to the hard of hearing you shout, and for the almost-blind, you draw large and startling figures.
—Mystery and Manners: Occasional Prose (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1969) pp. 33-34 [my emphasis]
Merry Christmas to all!!!
“The Nativity” (1776-1777) by John Singleton Copley pic.twitter.com/KEdKgL3OLD
— Isabel Azar (@izzyroseazar) December 26, 2021
It is unsurprising that euthanasia consistently breaks its boundaries, always presented as an expansion of choice as the route to kindness. This is rooted in liberalism’s fundamental presuppositions, for as George Grant wrote, “it is the very signature of modern man to deny reality to any conception of good that imposes limits on human freedom … man’s essence is his freedom. Nothing must stand in the way of our absolute freedom to create the world as we want it. There must be no conceptions of good that put limitations on human action.” If there is no ultimate value towards which our lives point, then “the vaunted freedom of the individual to choose becomes either the necessity of finding one’s role in the public engineering or the necessity of retreating into the privacy of pleasure”. We are reduced to utilitarian measures of the good, achieved through harm reduction and happiness maximisation, materialistically defined.
The result of the liberal conception of the human person is expressive individualism, where “persons are conceived merely as atomized individual wills whose highest flourishing consists in interrogating the interior depths of the self in order to express and freely follow the original truths discovered therein toward one’s self-invented destiny”. This conception of the human person privileges cognition, will, rationality and autonomy in defining full personhood. Our nature as embodied souls is largely ignored: if one cannot employ one’s body to achieve the desires of one’s autonomous, rational, willed cognition, then one cannot achieve full personhood.
As a result, the constraints of our existential finitude made so explicit by disability are seen as immoral barriers to maximal autonomy attained through rational will. The unchosen bonds of interdependence, obligation, reciprocity and mutual loyalty that comprise the texture and meaning of life are denigrated. Liberalism discards the weak just as the Greco-Roman world once did, now done for reasons of supposed benevolence. From Locke onwards, liberalism has always seen some more capable of, and suited to, forming political society than others. Mill took this furthest in his proposal of colonisation and slavery for those less capable of freedom.
It is not such a stretch from liberalism’s definition of the individual’s capacity for personhood to advocating the killing of disabled infants deemed incapable of fulfilling this. As Leon Kass has written, it is no surprise that those Germans who coined the phrase “life unworthy of life” were two liberals: a jurist and an academic. Better to curb the depersonalised source of the suffering with all haste. James Burnham viewed liberalism as the ideological legitimator and enabler of Western suicide. I’m not sure he meant for the title of his book to be taken so literally, across so many countries.
Read it all from 2022.
As assisted suicide is in the news again, re-upping my piece for @TheCriticMag from last year, in which I argue that assisted suicide is not only wrong in itself, but that it’s the logical endpoint of the liberal view of the human person https://t.co/ZMK8sy5Pyh
— Henry George (@intothefuture45) December 22, 2023
Assisted suicide is banned in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, with a maximum prison sentence of 14 years. While there is no specific offence of assisted suicide in Scotland, euthanasia is illegal and can be prosecuted as murder or culpable homicide.
Rantzen says she’s joined assisted dying clinic
Mr Stride, one of 27 Conservative MPs who voted for the 2015 bill, said he thought some MPs could be wondering “whether this should be something we look at again”.
“The government has not decided to bring forward legislation,” he told the Today programme on Wednesday, “but if Parliament in some form or another decided that it wanted to have a fresh look at this, given it was some years ago that we last did so, that’s not something that I would be resistant to.”
Glad this article calls this for what it is: assisted suicide. I have argued against this in all my episcopal roles and will continue to do so. Investment in palliative care is essential. It will so often be the vulnerable who would suffer most in this. https://t.co/g94iLf0yQZ
— Bishop of Newcastle (@BishopNewcastle) December 20, 2023
….if the sexed nature of the body is irrelevant to the most intimate of human personal interactions, then who I am is detached from my body in a most fundamental way. I become something that inhabits my body and uses it as an instrument, not something that I am. In sum, one cannot desecrate the body and retain a stable notion of personhood any more than Nietzsche thinks one can kill God and keep the earth hitched to the sun.
If sex is no longer sacred, then practices relating to death have followed a similar path. Once it was a sacred mystery; now we mobilize social and technological forces to deny it. Violence and death, once too sacred to be depicted onstage in Greek tragedy, have become the trivial or pornographic fare of movies and video games. The Roman Colosseum made death a matter of entertainment; today, movies and video games bring pornographic violence into the living rooms, indeed the palms, of everyone with a television, a game console, or a smartphone.
Real death is a purely medical affair, with the dying placed in hospitals and hospices. The battle against the body is significant here too, for what is the final authority that the body possesses? Not to dictate our sex as male or female, but to dictate that we are mortal. In light of this, euthanasia looks like one last (and arguably futile) attempt to seize control of who we are.
The attempt to domesticate mortality continues after death. Churches are no longer typically built with graveyards, with the result that worship is today not experienced in the vicinity of dead loved ones. Funerals are becoming celebrations of life. Every year, cremations rise in popularity in America. There may well be practical reasons for this—cost, lack of space—but it still serves to incinerate any lasting, visible reminder from among the living of the dead as the dead. True, some have urns with the ashes of loved ones. But the jar on the mantel at home is different from—dare one say less sacred than?—a burial ground next to a place of worship. It is hard to maintain quiet reverence when the television is blaring and the kettle is boiling.
Carl Trueman on the Desecration of Man. As usual, he's spot on. https://t.co/AxXHGY8XYS
— Mackenzie Boudreaux (@PaperandPipe) December 13, 2023
“The bishops have exported this division down to every single local parish”
Two ordained women – Rev Catherine Bond and her partner Rev Jane Pearse – became one of the first same-sex couples to be blessed at a Church of England service, at St John the Baptist Church in Felixstowe yesterday. The couple has reportedly acknowledged that there is still “a lot pain” over the existence of their relationship.
The move to bless same-sex relationships has caused widespread division within the denomination, throughout the seven year process of deliberation and discernment known as ‘Living in Love and Faith’. Conservatives, who believe marriage must be heterosexual, and liberals pressing for change have yet to reach agreement or even a happy compromise.
Dunnett says it remains a highly divisive situation: “You’re going to have fractious debate at parochial church council meetings. You’re going to have vicars having to explain to people why they’re not doing this…
“This is going to be a recipe for distrust. It’s going to bring fracture to relationships that have up to now been good in local parishes.
“Already we’re hearing from clergy person after clergy person and from PCC members in dioceses all over the country that they are fearing what is now going to happen.”
There’s a lot to take in. Noticing a huge silence on the part of various bishops on social media in reaction to the papal pronouncement, Catholic blogger Amy Welborn said it for all the laity out there:
Whassup?
Judging by their silence on Twitter/X feeds, I’m guessing the papal pronouncement came as a surprise to the bishops, too. Were I one of these men in red hats, I’d be furious. They’re made to look like fools. The laity are wondering: Is this a change in doctrine or not?
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops put out a statement saying that no, it actually was not, because same-sex unions were not considered marriage but that “anyone can ask for a blessing when they are seeking God’s assistance, mercy and grace.” What does this mean? Is this something like bringing up a pet for a blessing during an annual St. Francis Day service?
Most others saw it as a major shift in doctrine, including the Rev. James Martin, a Jesuit and LGBTQ+ advocate who is editor-at-large for America magazine and someone whose ministry has been openly praised by Pope Francis.
Reaction to the note from LGBTQ Catholics and advocates touted the declaration as a major step forward. Commentary from some theologians, meanwhile, cautioned that it’s misleading to frame the declaration as a kind of monumental shift.https://t.co/CEtthGF4pa
— Crux (@Crux) December 19, 2023
On 5 December, a U.S. company called Orchid Health announced that it would begin to offer fertility clinics and their hopeful customers the unprecedented option to sequence the whole genomes of embryos conceived by in vitro fertilization (IVF). “Find the embryo at lowest risk for a disease that runs in your family,” touts the company’s website. The cost: $2500 per embryo.
Although Orchid and at least two other companies have already been conducting more limited genetic screening of IVF embryos, the new test offers something more: Orchid will look not just for single-gene mutations that cause disorders such as cystic fibrosis, but also more extensively for medleys of common and rare gene variants known to predispose people to neurodevelopmental disorders, severe obesity, and certain psychiatric conditions such as schizophrenia.
That new offering drew swift backlash from genomics researchers who claim the company inappropriately uses their data to generate some of its risk estimates. The Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (PGC), an international group of more than 800 researchers working to decode the genetic and molecular underpinnings of mental health conditions, says Orchid’s new test relies on data it produced over the past decade, and that the company has violated restrictions against the data’s use for embryo screening.
Genetics group slams company for using its data to screen embryos’ genomes: Orchid Health’s new in vitro fertilization embryo test aims to predict future health and mental issues | Science | AAAS https://t.co/RukcF29qiJ
— Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics (@bermaninstitute) December 18, 2023
In the 16th century, the Belgian cartographer Abraham Ortelius created the world’s first modern atlas — a collection of maps that he called “The Theater of the World.” The maps, drawn by Ortelius and others, detailed what was at the time the best knowledge of the world’s continents, cities, mountains, rivers, lakes and oceans and helped usher in a new understanding of global geography.
Similarly, the creation of cell atlases — maps of organs and bodies constructed cell by cell — is heralding a new era in our understanding of biology. Powerful sequencing and imaging technologies invented in the last decade are revealing with unprecedented detail the composition of human organs and tissues, from the pancreas and liver to the placenta, as well as those of other animals like the mouse and fruit fly. With these new tools, researchers can fingerprint individual cells based on which genes they are expressing. That information has revealed subtle and unsuspected distinctions among cells and has begun to illuminate how the diversity of cell types can be essential to the healthy functioning of organs.
“We’re at this amazing point in time in science where we’re now able to understand the composition of these cell types,” said Steve Quake, a bioengineer and biophysicist at Stanford University who helped develop the technologies that make cell atlases possible. “It’s changed the way we understand how human biology works.”
.@QuantaMagazine: "New Cell Atlases Reveal Untold Variety in the Brain and Beyond"
✍️ @yasemin_sap#studyBRAIN #BICCN @USBrainAlliancehttps://t.co/S1M3aH820s
— Allen Institute (@AllenInstitute) December 13, 2023
“I’m really saddened by this,” he said. “There’s lots of clergy, evangelical clergy, middle of the road clergy and Catholic Church clergy, who are really disappointed that the House of bishops have taken this step against a lot of advice and knowing that it’s going to cause massive damage to the Church of England. So I’m disappointed that we, as a Church are putting forward prayers and we are doing it on such a narrow margin in terms of votes for and against.
“There are lots of clergy and churches who want to know how they’re going to be looked after if they dissent, if they continue to hold to the doctrine of the Church of England. None of that has been explained that this point.
“Some things in the pastoral guidance show that bishops are almost washing their hands of clergy and the doctrine. It feels like we’re almost being gaslit.”
[The] Rev [Mr] Ould said that just before the House of Bishops meeting, a broad alliance of Anglo Catholics and evangelicals had written to the bishops telling them not to go ahead with the guidance.
CofE bishops are ‘washing their hands of doctrine’ over same sex blessings says vicar – Premier Christian News | Headlines, Breaking News, Comment & Analysis https://t.co/UKYjUjgEV6
— GospelLover (@hateisfutile) December 14, 2023
The House of Bishops’ decision to commend the prayers of blessing for same-sex couples was made despite a last-minute plea from leaders in the HTB network. Inclusive groups are urging churches to use the prayers this Sunday.
A group calling itself “the Alliance”, which comprises the current and former vicars of Holy Trinity, Brompton (HTB), the Revd Archie Coates and the Revd Nicky Gumbel, along with 23 other figures in the C of E, wrote to the Bishops on Monday, the day before the meeting at which agreement was reached to commend the prayers…
The letter says: “It is not too late to delay the commending of the Prayers of Love and Faith until the complete package of the Prayers, the full Pastoral Guidance and the Pastoral Reassurance are all presented to Synod.”
The Bishops are also urged to provide “formal legal structural provision” for those who object to the introduction of the prayers. Such a settlement “will enable those who feel compelled to pursue changes to doctrine and practice to be able to minister freely without their actions causing growing schism in the Church of England”, the group writes.
Read it all (registration or subscription).
The House of Bishops’ decision to commend the prayers of blessing for same-sex couples was made despite a last-minute plea from leaders in the HTB network. Inclusive groups are urging churches to use the prayers this Sunday. https://t.co/MMwrokW6cW
— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) December 14, 2023
Blessings for same-sex couples can take place within existing church services from this Sunday, after the House of Bishops formally commended the Prayers of Love and Faith at a meeting on Tuesday.
A statement on Tuesday afternoon revealed that the Bishops had voted 24-11, with three recorded abstentions, in favour of commending the collection of prayers, which were first published in draft form in January….
Two marathon debates in the General Synod, in February and November, ended with votes approving the Bishops’ plan to commend the blessings, despite threats of legal action if they were to go ahead….
The blessings have only being sanctioned for use within regular services, and not as a stand-alone service. In the Synod in November, an amendment calling on the Bishops to consider a trial period for stand-alone services was carried, albeit narrowly….
Blessings for same-sex couples can take place within existing church services from this Sunday, after the House of Bishops formally commended the Prayers of Love and Faith at a meeting on Tuesday. https://t.co/4MuuNMnPpc
— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) December 12, 2023
A YouTuber who intentionally crashed his plane in Southern California and recorded a video of it in a scheme “to gain notoriety and to make money” has been sentenced to six months in prison for obstructing an investigation into the crash by destroying the wreckage, federal prosecutors said Monday.
The YouTuber, Trevor D. Jacob, 30, of Lompoc, Calif., pleaded guilty in June to one count of destruction and concealment with the intent to obstruct a federal investigation, after he removed the wrecked plane from the crash site in December 2021, just over two weeks after the episode, according to a plea agreement filed in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles.
He was sentenced on Wednesday by Judge John F. Walter, and ordered to surrender to the authorities by Jan. 29. “This experience has been so humbling,” Mr. Jacob said in a statement shared by his lawyers. He described the sentence as the “right decision.”
A YouTuber who intentionally crashed his plane in California and recorded a video of it in a scheme “to gain notoriety and to make money” was sentenced to six months in prison for obstructing an investigation by destroying the wreckage, prosecutors said. https://t.co/PBiiRItPTI
— The New York Times (@nytimes) December 5, 2023
America’s mental-health crisis drove suicides to a record-high number last year.
Nearly 50,000 people in the U.S. lost their lives to suicide in 2022, according to a provisional tally from the National Center for Health Statistics. The agency said the final count would likely be higher. The suicide rate of 14.3 deaths per 100,000 people reached its highest level since 1941.
The record reflects broad struggles to help people in mental distress following a pandemic that killed more than one million in the U.S., upended the economy and left many isolated and afraid. A shortage of healthcare workers, an increasingly toxic illicit drug supply and the ubiquity of firearms have facilitated the rise in suicides, mental-health experts said.
“There was a rupture in our economic health and social fabric. We’re still experiencing the aftereffects of that,” said Jeffrey Leichter, a psychologist who connects mental health and primary care at Sanford Health, an operator of hospitals and clinics in the Dakotas, Minnesota and Iowa.
Read it all (cited by my colleague Jonathan Bennett in his Sunday sermon).
More people in the U.S. killed themselves last year than ever before. “There was a rupture in our economic health and social fabric. We’re still experiencing the aftereffects.” https://t.co/6p3RIZnT7l https://t.co/6p3RIZnT7l
— The Wall Street Journal (@WSJ) November 29, 2023
The problem is that, as with the former Prime Minister’s claim, nobody really believes this is the case. How many people really believe that:
Charlie Bell, a supporter of getting PLF done but also a severe critic of the latest proposals, recently wrote “what the bishops have done may be legal, but it is not honest”. This echoes the language of Canon C1 and the oath of canonical obedience. The way in which the bishops are proceeding—the “nothing has changed” argument and the refusal to publish the written legal advice they have received—is very difficult to view as honest and to trust. Given the law has not formally been changed, for many the introduction of PLF means that the doctrine to which the law refers has changed in practice. If, as it is being claimed, doctrine has not changed, then what is being proposed seems to many to be not only “not honest” but also, as shown by past legal advice, probably “not legal”.
In short, unless we sincerely believe and are convinced that “nothing has changed”, then we have to say that it appears the bishops are acting in their commendation, and thereby encouraging clergy to act in their services, in ways which are unlawful. In addition, those liturgical actions are now—because of the bishops’ decisions, which do not alter the legality of what they commend and so in one sense could be described as simply symbolic or “virtue signalling”—going to attract much more attention when they take place then they have done in the past. This means clergy who accept at face value and act on the basis of the bishops’ commendation are probably more likely to face legal challenge than they were in the past.
In the light of this, it even more unacceptable that the bishops are now so reticent to set out clearly for parish clergy, and those who advise them such as archdeacons, both
It has repeatedly been stated that the CofE's doctrine of marriage has not changed. Can the bishops commend the Prayers of Love and Faith with any credibility without sharing the legal and theological basis on which they are doing so? @theologyethics1 https://t.co/3c7RlIvjb9
— Dr Ian Paul (@Psephizo) November 28, 2023
One could object that it is not worthy of God to wield the sword. Is God not love, long-suffering and all-powerful love? A counter-question could go something like this: Is it not a bit too arrogant to presume that our contemporary sensibilities about what is compatible with God’s love are so much healthier than those of the people of God throughout the whole history of Judaism and Christianity? Recalling my arguments about the self-immunization of the evildoers, one could further argue that in a world of violence it would not be worthy of God not to wield the sword; if God were not angry at injustice and deception and did not make the final end to violence God would not be worthy of our worship. Here, however, I am less interested in arguing that God’s violence is not unworthy of God than in showing that it is beneficial to us. Atlan has rightly drawn our attention to the fact that in a world of violence we are faced with an inescapable alternative: either God’s violence or human violence. Most people who insist on God’s “nonviolence” cannot resist using violence themselves (or tacitly sanctioning its use by others). They deem the talk of God’s judgment irreverent, but think nothing of entrusting judgment into human hands, persuaded presumably that this is less dangerous and more humane than to believe in a God who judges! That we should bring “down the powerful from their thrones” (Luke 1:51-52) seems responsible; that God should do the same, as the song of that revolutionary Virgin explicitly states, seems crude. And so violence thrives, secretly nourished by belief in a God who refuses to wield the sword.
My thesis that the practice of nonviolence requires a belief in divine vengeance will be unpopular with many Christians, especially theologians in the West. To the person who is inclined to dismiss it, I suggest imagining that you are delivering a lecture in a war zone (which is where a paper that underlies this chapter was originally delivered). Among your listeners are people whose cities and villages have been first plundered, then burned and leveled to the ground, whose daughters and sisters have been raped, whose fathers and brothers have had their throats slit. The topic of the lecture: a Christian attitude toward violence. The thesis: we should not retaliate since God is perfect noncoercive love. Soon you would discover that it takes the quiet of a suburban home for the birth of the thesis that human nonviolence corresponds to God’s refusal to judge. In a scorched land, soaked in the blood of the innocent, it will invariably die. And as one watches it die, one will do well to reflect about many other pleasant captivities of the liberal mind.
–Miroslav Volf, Exclusion and Embrace: A Theological Exploration of Identity, Otherness, and Reconciliation (Nashville: Abingdon, 1996) pp. 303-304, cited by yours truly in the Sunday sermon
After the afternoon discussion with Yale Professors Ivo Banac and Miroslav Wolf #Decani #Monastery #rfpcourse #Kosovo pic.twitter.com/SOaDS0MKSY
— Dečani Monastery (@DecaniMonastery) August 16, 2013
To love at all is to be vulnerable. Love anything, and your heart will certainly be wrung and possibly be broken. If you want to make sure of keeping it intact, you must give your heart to no one, not even to an animal. Wrap it carefully round with hobbies and little luxuries; avoid all entanglements; lock it up safe in the casket or coffin of your selfishness. But in that casket – safe, dark, motionless, airless – it will change. It will not be broken; it will become unbreakable, impenetrable, irredeemable. The alternative to tragedy, or at least to the risk of tragedy, is damnation. The only place outside Heaven where you can be perfectly safe from all the dangers and perturbations of love is hell.
–C.S. Lewis, The Four Loves (London: Geoffrey Bles, 1960), pp. 138-139<
[Essayist Charles] Lamb [1775-1834] says somewhere that if, of three friends (A, B, and C), A should die, then B loses not only A but “A’s part in C”, while C loses not only A but “A’s part in B”. In each of my friends there is something that only some other friend can fully bring out. By myself I am not large enough to call the whole man into activity; I want other lights than my own to show all his facets. Now that Charles [Williams] is dead, I shall never again see Ronald [J R R Tolkien]’s reaction to a specifically Caroline joke. Far from having more of Ronald, having him “to myself” now that Charles is away, I have less of Ronald. Hence true Friendship is the least jealous of loves. Two friends delight to be joined by a third, and three by a fourth, if only the newcomer is qualified to become a real friend. They can then say, as the blessed souls say in Dante, “Here comes one who will augment our loves.” For in this love “to divide is not to take away”. Of course the scarcity of kindred souls–not to mention practical considerations about the size of rooms and the audibility of voices–set limits to the enlargement of the circle; but within those limits we possess each friend not less but more as the number of those with whom we share him increases. In this, Friendship exhibits a glorious “nearness by resemblance” to Heaven itself where the very multitude of the blessed (which no man can number) increases the fruition which each has of God. For every soul, seeing Him in her own way, doubtless communicates that unique vision to all the rest. That, says an old author, is why the Seraphim in Isaiah’s vision are crying “Holy, Holy, Holy” to one another (Isaiah VI, 3). The more we thus share the Heavenly Bread between us, the more we shall all have.
–CS Lewis The Four Loves Chapter 4
For many in the Church of England a line was crossed this week that we prayed and hoped would not happen.
On Wednesday afternoon, the General Synod expressed its support by a tiny majority of just a few votes for the continued implementation of the House of Bishops proposals to change the position and practice of the Church of England with regards to sexual ethics and marriage.
In practice we now expect the bishops to commend prayers of blessing for same sex couples by mid-December (and provide dedicated services soon after), to prepare guidance which will make it possible for clergy to marry their same sex partners, and that future ordinands will not to be asked to indicate whether their lifestyle and personal relationships are in keeping with the doctrine of the Church of England.
We believe these proposals are being pursued without adequate provision and protection for those holding to the biblical, historic and global majority Anglican view on marriage and sexual intimacy. This underlines the failure of leadership by the archbishops and divided House and College of Bishops….
Responding to the 15 November 2023 General Synod decision: looking forward – The Church of England Evangelical Council https://t.co/uCRNEJTIW2
— Simon Sarmiento (@simonsarmiento) November 18, 2023
From there:
We are saddened to know that the General Synod of the Church of England has passed a resolution to bless same sex unions despite almost 50% of the Synod opposing the bishops’ proposal. This disastrous decision creates the same serious consequences of differentiation and division as in other provinces and further fractures our beloved Anglican Communion.
On behalf of the Primates of the Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches (GSFA), I once again affirm the GSFA Ash Wednesday Statement which we made on Feb 20th this year (2023). We wholeheartedly support the faithful bishops, clergy and laity within the Church of England and assure them of our continuing prayers and pastoral commitment as a global body.
“……. Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life.” Revelation 2:10
Congratulations to Archbishop Justin Badi Arama who was enthroned as Archbishop of South Sudan this weekend!
We pray that God will use him to uphold the authority of scripture and the true gospel of Jesus Christ in South Sudan and beyond. pic.twitter.com/hxEWNPx93O
— GAFCON (@gafconference) April 25, 2018
We have now had years of headlines talking about new research into using psychedelic drugs for therapy and, along with it, an increase in spiritual seekers.
Studies about the use of psychedelic drugs for therapy have been growing for years, with increased institutional involvement from universities, Congress, and the US Department of Defense to name just a few.
Outside of clinical trials, psychedelic use among young adults has nearly tripled in the past decade. Religious leaders—including hospital chaplains and religious psychotherapists—are also exploring the use of these drugs, as recently reported by NPR and Esquire. Ordained clergy are even conducting underground retreats that blend psychedelics with Christian worship with an emphasis on “healing.”
While I believe there are likely legitimate-use cases for psychedelic therapy that will bear out in time, I want to raise awareness of the many psychological risks of psychedelics that are often underemphasized in the research. And as a pastor, I feel an urgency to inform Christians of the serious spiritual risks of psychedelics—including the idolatry of spiritual experience.
“As a pastor, I feel an urgency to inform Christians of the serious spiritual risks of psychedelics—including the idolatry of spiritual experience.”
From @revjoewelker: https://t.co/HcusnXPudl
— Christianity Today (@CTmagazine) November 16, 2023
Stand-alone services of blessing for same-sex couples are to go ahead in trial form, after an amendment was made — by a narrow vote — to the main motion being debated by the General Synod.
The final motion was carried on Wednesday afternoon in all three Houses: Bishops 23-10, Clergy 100-93, and Laity 104-100.
The motion stated that the Synod “recognise the progress made by the House of Bishops towards implementing the motion on Living in Love and Faith (LLF) in February 2023 . . . and encourage the House to continue its work of implementation”.
The margins in the final vote were tighter than they had been in February’s vote on the original proposals…, in the House of Bishops as in the others: nine months ago, only four bishops voted against.
Stand-alone services of blessing for same-sex couples are to go ahead in trial form, after an amendment was made — by a narrow vote — to the main motion being debated by the General Synod.https://t.co/q3vLOH8NmF
— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) November 15, 2023
10.6 Faced with these problems there would appear to be broadly three (not necessarily mutually exclusive) pathways forward that would have some degree of theological integrity and which might enable the Church of England to proceed in a way that minimises conflict and division and maintains as high a degree of communion as possible in the light of where we now are:
Pausing in order to refine and develop further the theological arguments set out here in Annex H and then seeking a consensus for them in their final articulation as an adequate theological rationale for a form of PLF consistent with them and for new pastoral guidance and pastoral reassurance including any “formal structural pastoral provision in this time of uncertainty” (Introduction, para 18, p.3);
Recognising that for “a time of uncertainty” we have well-established processes in relation to liturgical development and so using Canon B2 (and the need for two-thirds support for any change in all 3 Houses of General Synod at the end of the process) for all of PLF;
Acknowledging that our deeper problem is that the Church has within it two significantly sized groupings divided over whether the existing doctrine is right and should shape our pastoral and liturgical life or is wrong and needs to be replaced with an alternative theology that should then shape our pastoral and liturgical life. Each of these has a clear and internally consistent theological rationale. What is therefore likely needed is not an unsatisfactory and unstable mix of supposed doctrinal continuity but with significant practical changes based on a “new insight into doctrine”. Instead, we need to seek some form of new structural settlement which would give to each of these contrasting and competing theologies their own secure, legally defined and episcopally-led ecclesial space with theological integrity and as high a degree of communion as possible between them within the Church of England.
As General Synod gathers, some thoughts on the theological rationale being offered for PLF with thanks again to @Psephizo for posting. https://t.co/R3RmHgE3pU
— Andrew Goddard (@goddardaj) November 13, 2023
How is it that the noun “mission” has come so to dominate the avalanche of Anglican reports and episcopal directives? It is oddly contentless, unlike the older word “evangelism”, which suggests that we have the good news of the gospel to impart. What is little understood is how this word has come to be shaped by modern management theory.
Successful managers, Lyndon Shakespeare writes, are “makers of worlds by the use of words”, and those words must have particular qualities: “low in definition and direct reference, vague and mysterious in terms of precise content, easy to say, vivid and radical sounding in metaphorical and imagistic terms”. Two key terms that theorists employ for such world-making are “mission” and “vision”, and readers hardly need to be reminded of the recent use of these words in the Vision and Strategy documents.
The distinction between the two terms is that the vision gives the organisation direction and meaning, while the mission strategy points to how it will realise its purpose. The Church of England, however, while embracing managerialism with an unholy hospitality, has confused mission and vision so that mission has displaced the vision to become an end in itself. Every single facet of our lives as Christians is held to be for the sake of mission, and is subsumed in utilitarian fashion to this end.
Critique of managerialism in the CofE by Alison Milbank @SaveTheParish https://t.co/TcJpCXeRK5
— john milbank (@johnmilbank3) October 28, 2023
A group of 44 bishops made a public statement on Wednesday afternoon expressing their hope that pastoral guidance allowing priests to be in same-sex marriages would be issued “without delay”.
The statement in favour of reform follows three weeks after 12 bishops publicly dissented from a majority decision by the House of Bishops to commend prayers for same-sex couples….
The new group, 15 diocesan bishops and 29 suffragans, write that they “recognise the complexities of the Pastoral Guidance in relation to ministry, and also the need for a swift end to the current uncertainty for LGBTQIA+ clergy and ordinands.
“We look forward to Guidance being issued without delay that includes the removal of all restrictions on clergy entering same-sex civil marriages, and on bishops’ ordaining and licensing such clergy, as well as granting permissions to officiate.”Read it all (registration or subscription).
Don’t delay guidance allowing priests to be in same-sex marriages, say 44 bishops https://t.co/81hu1fsLkH
— Simon Sarmiento (@simonsarmiento) November 1, 2023