Story number three. It is February 2023. The setting for this final act of witness is my first-ever trip to Israel under the auspices of The Philos Project.

In the Book of Matthew, Jesus asks, rhetorically, “What did you go out into the desert to see?” It’s a question that travelers to the Holy Land of any faith can only answer for themselves. But one sight that did not exist until the second half of the twentieth century should not be missed by anyone. That is Yad Vashem, the Holocaust memorial museum.

Obviously, Israel is about much more than the Holocaust. To focus on Yad Vashem is not to detract from any of the country’s enormous historical, social, spiritual, cultural, or other riches. But for anyone who has been to Israel, and even more, for those who have not, to scant Yad Vashem in discussing anti-Semitism would be inexplicable. Let me cite the observation of the late British novelist Martin Amis. Amis, who was not Jewish, was once asked why his mind and work returned so often to the Holocaust. He replied by citing a German novelist, who said, because “no serious person ever thinks about anything else.”

Read it all.

"To love life as Catholics do is to love the Jews from whose roots we grew."

— @EberstadtMary, one of our speakers at @FranciscanU last week, writes on the importance of Catholic-Jewish relations in light of rising antisemitism.

Read in @firstthingsmag:https://t.co/C22ueD4Jez

— The Philos Project (@philosproject) October 28, 2023

The first thing to note is that it is not only difficult, but impossible, to argue that what the bishops are proposing is not a departure from teaching contained in the bishops’ statements concerning Civil Partnerships and same-sex marriages in 2005, 2014 and 2019. In these statements the bishops said that public prayers should not be said for same-sex couples. What is now being proposed is that such prayers should be offered. If the Bishops previous teaching constitutes doctrine for the purposes of clause (g) of the February General Synod motion and for the purposes of the Canons, then what is proposed is contrary to the doctrine of the Church of England.

The bishops argument seems to be that this change from previous teaching is not indicative of a change in any ‘essential matter’ because they are not proposing any change to the Church’s doctrine of marriage or its doctrine of sexual ethics which says that sexual intercourse should only take place within marriage (meaning a marriage with two people of the  opposite sex). Where their argument falls down is that if the Church of England’s doctrines of marriage and sexual ethics are viwed alongside the Church’s doctrine concerning the need for repentance and forgiveness for sin, then what they are proposing is necessarily a change of doctrine in an ‘essential matter.’

To understand why this is the case, the point that has to be grasped is that it is an absolutely essential part of Church of England doctrine that in order for people to be rightly related to God in this life and eternally happy with him in the next, they have to acknowledge, repent of, and confess their sins, not only in private but in the context of public worship, so that their sins may be forgiven and no longer constitute a barrier between them and God.

This doctrine is made crystal clear, for example, in the opening paragraphs of the service of Morning Prayer in the Book of Common Prayer:

Read it all.

Martin Davie–Why the Church of England Bishops Cannot Do what they are doing with Prayers for Same Sex couples https://t.co/ZiZJOWkIHC #anglican #theology #analysis #marriage #anthropology #ethics #holyscripture #BCP #anglican #religion #parishministry #UK 'The bishops argument… pic.twitter.com/FUM7TZSatW

— Kendall Harmon (@KendallHarmon6) October 27, 2023

More than 10,000 people received modern-slavery victim support from the Salvation Army under its government contract last year — the highest in the 12 years since it began. This included more than 3000 new referrals, up by five per cent on the previous year.

The figures are set out in the charity’s annual report Behind the Shield: Protecting and supporting survivors of modern slavery, published on Anti-Slavery Day on Wednesday of last week. It is the 12th year that the Government has contracted the Salvation Army to provide specialist support for adult victims of modern slavery referred from England and Wales.

In that year — between July 2022 and June 2023 — 3533 potential victims contacted the Salvation Army for support: a five-per-cent increase (465 more people) over the previous year. Of the potential victims, one third were women, two-thirds were men, and 1.5 per cent identified as transgender.

The use of the term “potential” means that there is reasonable evidence that the person is a victim, but that this has yet to be confirmed by decision-making bodies in the Home Office, the report explains.

Read it all.

Modern slavery on the increase, Salvation Army reports https://t.co/xtSnB0LFTl

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) October 26, 2023

Nearly one in four people worldwide — which translates into more than a billion people — feel very or fairly lonely, according to a recent Meta-Gallup survey of more than 140 countries.

Notably, these numbers could be even higher. The survey represents approximately 77% of the world’s adults because it was not asked in the second-most populous country in the world, China.

With the World Health Organization and many others — including the U.S. surgeon general — calling attention to the dangers of loneliness, these data, collected in partnership between Gallup and Meta, provide a much-needed global perspective of social wellbeing.

Read it all.

Large Gallup Survey: Almost a Quarter of the World Feels Lonely. Nearly one in four people worldwide — which translates into more than a billion people — feel very or fairly lonely, according to a recent Meta-Gallup survey of more than 140 countries. https://t.co/UDl43iqdN1

— Carl Hindy, Ph.D., Clinical Psychologist (@DrCarlHindy) October 24, 2023

III. RESETTING THE COMMUNION:

9. To press on in resetting theCommunion according to its biblical & historical roots:

a) The Anglican world has changed so dramatically in the last century. In 1900, about 80% of the Communion lived in England. Today, about 75%of Anglicans are estimated to live in Global South countries. The demographics have changed, and sadly in our day the theology of many bishops in the Church of England has also changed towards revisionism. We need new wineskins for a new reality.

b) On the 9th of October 2023, the Church of England House of Bishops signalled their intent to commend prayers of blessing for same sex couples. Despite all that is happening, we as orthodox leaders are very encouraged to see orthodox groupings within the Church of England beginning to collectively stand against this revisionism in their Church. We applaud the 12 bishops in the Church of England who have indicated that they are unable to support the decision by their House of Bishops, and we will uphold them in our prayers. We will stand with orthodox Anglicans in England both now and going forward.

c) We lament with tears all that has happened to the historic ‘mother church’ of the communion, and continue to pray for her restoration. At the same time, orthodox Anglican churches and entities will press on with the work God has given us to do as he renews the fallen creation through the finished work of Jesus Christ our Lord.

d) In relation to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the other instruments of communion, we affirm the Ash Wednesday Statement and the Kigali Statement.

10. As orthodox Primates, we reaffirm our adherence to Lambeth Resolution 1.10 of 1998 in full, both in moral teaching and pastoral care. We recognise this resolution as the official teaching of the Anglican Communion on marriage and sexuality and urge that renewed steps be taken to encourage all provinces to abide by this doctrine in the faith, order, and practice.

Read it all.

Grateful for this statement from #GFSA & @gafconference Primates. It is, I think, realistic about the global position & helpful for England. Good see the involvement of @AnglicanCE and @AMiE_Anglican. The view taken of @JustinWelby is clear & consistent. https://t.co/XlO0zFA2n8

— Dan Leafe (@DanLeafe1) October 22, 2023

Read it all.

The National Safeguarding Team (NST) of the Church of England has produced its first set of national safeguarding standards, which are to be applied in dioceses, parishes, and churches, with immediate effect https://t.co/4dD8Itj3FG

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) October 18, 2023

Let me try to distill this Augustinian theory of change into three basic theological assumptions:

1. First, as I’ve already said, human beings are driven not by knowledge or will but by desire. We are creatures of the heart, creatures of love.

2. Second, the human heart is very hard to change. It strongly resists direct efforts to change it. The truth of this point is easy to demonstrate. Have you ever tried to change someone’s mind about politics through rational argument? Have you ever tried to talk someone out of loving the person they have fallen in love with? I rest my case.

3. Third, human beings are wired in such a way that judgment kills love. When we feel judged, we hide our love away, we put up our walls, we resist. If your theory of change depends in any way on the idea that telling someone what is wrong with them will lead to them changing what is wrong with them, you will be sorely ineffective. Augustine says it beautifully in his treatise On the Spirit and the Letter: “[The law] commands, after all, rather than helps; it teaches us that there is a disease without healing it. In fact, it increases what it does not heal so that we seek the medicine of grace with greater attention and care.”

Rather than elaborating on why I think Augustine is right, I want to cut to the chase and ask what the implications of the Augustinian theory of change are for Christian ministry. And I think there are in fact some very specific practical implications. If you want to do ministry the Augustinian way, if you want to use a hammer drill instead of spending your time wearing down your battery, then your ministry will need a certain shape, certain contours.

Read it all.

Delighted to see this column from @drmoore over at @CTmagazine reflecting thoughtfully and in detail on my article "The Cure of Souls: Theory of Change in Christian Ministry" https://t.co/dnh10QnZa3

— Simeon Zahl (@simeonzahl) August 5, 2023

On Monday the House of Bishops reached a decisive point in the journey discerning how to proceed in relation to Living in Love and Faith. We have participated in good faith in attempts to find consensus but were unable to support the decisions taken on Monday. There was deep disagreement within the House. Sharing the profound concerns of many in the Church of England and in the wider Communion, with heavy hearts we find it necessary to dissent publicly from the decisions of the House.

We welcome the fact that the House recognised the need for General Synod to exercise its legitimate responsibilities in relation to liturgy and doctrine under Canon B2. However, the decision to commend the suite of prayers for use in public services bypasses those procedures and does not permit the General Synod to consider the full significance of the prayers. Nor can Synod determine whether the bishops have fulfilled their intention (supported in February) that the final form of the prayers should not be “indicative of a departure from the doctrine of the Church of England”. Indeed, legal and theological advice the House has received suggest clearly to us that the decisions of the House may fall short of this commitment.

We are also firmly of the view that we need to adhere to the commitment made to bring the Prayers of Love and Faith, the pastoral guidance and pastoral reassurance (including whatever formal structural provision is necessary) to Synod as a single package, rather than doing so in a piecemeal fashion.

Read it all.

Exclusive: Dissenting bishops speak out on same-sex blessings | Opinion | Premier Christianity https://t.co/JfvozFZBuO

— Simon Sarmiento (@simonsarmiento) October 12, 2023

THE House of Bishops has agreed in principle to commend prayers of blessing for same-sex couples, but the authorisation of new stand-alone services for such blessings is to require a long and uncertain synodical process, it was revealed on Monday evening.

The House of Bishops met on Monday to decide the next steps in the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) process, after which a press release was issued by Church House, Westminster.

It was not immediately clear exactly what the announcement meant in practice: the statement said that the House had “agreed in principle” that the Prayers of Love and Faith “should be commended for use”. It is understood that formal commendation will not occur until after the Synod has met in November.

The requirement of a full synodical process for the authorisation of special services in which the prayers are featured does not mean that the prayers themselves cannot be used between their commendation and the authorisation of the stand-alone services: Canon B5 allows for ministers to use their discretion to make alterations to existing services….

Read it all.

The House of Bishops has agreed in principle to commend prayers of blessing for same-sex couples, but authorisation of new stand-alone services for such blessings is to require a long and uncertain synodical process, it was revealed on Monday evening

https://t.co/c5pCxqBfcZ

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) October 12, 2023

Two things stand out at this point. First, Stanley and the pope seem to have missed something very basic: Christian pastoral strategy cannot be developed in isolation from Christian anthropology. Both the question of sexual identity and the politics that surround it are not primarily concerned with sexual behavior. They are actually about what it means to be a human being. For Christians, far more is therefore at stake in this debate than the question of which sexual acts are moral and which are immoral. Once sex becomes recreation and once it is detached from the body’s own sexual script, what it means to be human has fundamentally changed. Sexual complementarity, the telos of marriage, and the analogy between Christ and the church all lose their significance. In a society like ours, therefore, how we think about what it means to be human has undergone a significant change. The anthropology of modern Western society is fundamentally incompatible with a Christian doctrine of man. Failure to see this and then try to argue that codes of sexual morality are negotiable and can be subordinated to pastoral strategies of love and affirmation is to contradict central tenets of the Christian faith.

Second, the emergence within the orthodox church of voices prepared to identify Christian teaching and practice as the problem in this area may seem edgy and prophetic to those involved—“Didn’t the church get slavery wrong?”—but in reality it is as unprophetic as is possible. The church has always had—and needed—prophets because she is a fallible institution made up of fallible people. And yes she has made some terrible mistakes, not least with the matter of slavery. But what is interesting today is the inverted role of the modern prophet. While Isaiah and his colleagues saw their task as calling the people away from the anthropology of the wider world and back to that of the covenant God, today’s prophets seem to see their task as being religious mouthpieces for the priorities of the wider culture, calling the church away from a Christian anthropology and toward that of the world around. It is one thing to have The New York Times, The Atlantic, and MSNBC pointing to the church’s teaching as problematic because it will not recite the liturgy of the world. It is quite another thing to have Christians effectively proffer precisely the same criticism of brothers and sisters in Christ. Prophets warn the church when she is too close to the world. They do not go to the world to tell the pundits that the church is not worldly enough. The pope’s ambiguity and Stanley’s casuistry serve only to embolden the representatives of the pseudo-prophetic industry of Christian leaders who delight in telling the world that, yes, the church really is the problem.

Read it all.

The anthropology of modern Western society is fundamentally incompatible with a Christian doctrine of man.https://t.co/WypVT4N0Rr

— First Things (@firstthingsmag) October 5, 2023

The Church of England’s House of Bishops has agreed in principle that prayers asking for God’s blessing for same-sex couples – known as Prayers of Love and Faith – should be commended for use.

The House, which met in London, also concluded that structures for special services for same-sex couples, based on Prayers of Love and Faith, should go forward to be formally authorised under canon law.

The bishops will bring proposals to General Synod next month which will pave the way for a process that would lead to the authorisation of these special services under Canon B2.

This process, expected to take until 2025, would involve consultation with every diocese and require approval by General Synod.

Read it all.

Bishops agree to commend Prayers of Love and Faith.

Read the full news at https://t.co/dMKCYsTMnV.

— The Church of England (@churchofengland) October 9, 2023

The story came from language in the pope’s July 11 letter, published by the Vatican. In response to a question about whether it is possible for the Church to consider same-sex unions as “possible goods,” the pope wrote several paragraphs which emphasized that there are relationships — presumably same-sex relationships among them — which are “not morally acceptable.”

The pope added that “the Church avoids any kind of rite or sacramental that could contradict” its doctrine regarding marriage, or “give the impression that something that is not marriage is recognized.”

Still, Pope Francis also allowed for the possibility that some kind of blessing could be conferred on one or more Catholics in “not-marriage” unions.

“Pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that do not transmit a mistaken conception of marriage. Because when a blessing is requested, one is expressing a request for help from God, a plea to be able to live better, a trust in a Father who can help us to live better.”

In short, the pope seemed to say, when people in an irregular union — perhaps a same-sex union — come to the parish for a blessing, it is worth discerning what they’re really asking for, and whether there is some way the Church can respond to that, even while avoiding the appearance of a nuptial blessing.

Read it all.

Pope Francis answers a dubia — Does inaction speak clearer than words? https://t.co/n1XazybIh0

— Mark Brumley (@mabrumley) October 3, 2023

Pope Francis’s Response to the Second Dubium

a. The Church has a very clear understanding of marriage: an exclusive, stable, and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to procreation. Only this union can be called “marriage.” Other forms of union realize it only in “a partial and analogous way” (Amoris Laetitia 292), so they cannot be strictly called “marriage.”

There is a clear understanding of what marriage is in the Bible and the Christian tradition.  Other forms of union may have some similarity to marriage, but they are not marriage.

b. It is not just a matter of names, but the reality we call marriage has a unique essential constitution that requires an exclusive name, not applicable to other realities. It is undoubtedly much more than a mere “ideal.”

Church teaching is that male/female marriage is a ‘thing’: an actual institution that exists in the lives of men and women, and does not just a distant ideal that we may strive for, or a malleable concept that can be redescribed.

c. For this reason, the Church avoids any type of rite or sacramental that might contradict this conviction and suggest that something that is not marriage is recognized as marriage.

In the UK context, this indicates that the Pope might accept civil partnerships as legal and social arrangements between people, but emphasises that they should not be celebrated in such a way as to make it seem as though they are marriage in the proper sense.

d. However, in our relationships with people, we must not lose the pastoral charity, which should permeate all our decisions and attitudes. The defence of objective truth is not the only expression of this charity; it also includes kindness, patience, understanding, tenderness, and encouragement. Therefore, we cannot be judges who only deny, reject, and exclude.

Charity (love) is of course always of prime importance in any discussion of human relationships.Part of charity is to speak the objective truth (i.e., that marriage is a ‘thing’ as per points a and b) but speaking objective truth cannot be the whole – the sum total – of a charitable response, which also must include an understanding and compassionate approach to people’s individual circumstances.

e. Therefore, pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that do not convey a mistaken concept of marriage.

Read it all.

Pope Francis’s new doctrine chief has said he believes the new structure of his department is working well, and includes a “democratic system” for handling queries or complaints which prohibits him from making unilateral decisions.https://t.co/TMQg6diL8r

— Crux (@Crux) October 3, 2023

On whether the practice of blessing same-sex unions is in keeping with Catholic revelation and the Church’s magisterium, Francis said “the Church has a very clear concept on marriage: An exclusive, stable and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to begetting children.”

“Only this union is called ‘marriage.’ Other forms of union are only realized ‘in a partial and analogous way’, which is why they cannot strictly be called ‘marriage,’” the pope said.

Sacramental marriage “is much more than a mere ‘ideal,’” he said, adding this is why the Church “avoids every type of rite or sacrament that can contradict this conviction and imply that something is recognized as marriage which is not.”

However, Pope Francis stressed the need for compassion in the Church’s pastoral care of homosexual individuals, and signaled an openness to blessing same-sex unions on a case-by-case basis.

“In dealing with people we must not lose pastoral charity, which must pass through all of our decisions and attitudes,” he said, saying “the defense of the objective truth is not the only expression of this charity, which is also made of kindness, patience, understanding, tenderness, and encouragement.”

Read it all.

Pope offers cautious ‘yes’ on blessing some same-sex unions, ‘no’ on women priests @Pontifex #PopeFrancis #Dubiahttps://t.co/LEVB2NVNPT

— Elise Ann Allen (@eliseannallen) October 2, 2023

We have archbishops openly rejecting the teaching they vowed to uphold. The bishops are showing a lack of respect for a clear, recognizable link between liturgy and doctrine, refusing to follow the proper synodical processes for introducing new (particularly controversial) liturgy in the life of the church, sidelining public theological reasoning and the work of FAOC, and possibly seeking to introduce new guidance contrary to existing doctrine without the proper synodical process that respects the principle of bishops not acting on their own but always as bishops in synod. Alongside this they are also effectively tearing the Church of England away from the Anglican Communion and wider church catholic.

These are not minor technical matters. These actions threaten to dissolve part of the glue that holds the church together and enables bishops to act as a focus of unity. The bishops appear to be abandoning precious gifts that have helped preserve, structure, and cultivate our often fragile common life together across our differences. They are disregarding and undermining well-established, tried and tested, theologically and pastorally (not simply legally) founded principles and practices that enable “good disagreement.” It is, however, only by living within their constraints that bishops will nurture trust and embody integrity, especially as we navigate contentious proposed changes in our teaching and practice.

It is a serious matter for the church to err on marriage and sexuality. That, however, is a problem in one specific, albeit vitally important, area. These developments, and how episcopal and archepiscopal power is being used — on the sole basis, it seems, that these means are necessary to reach the desired end goal — are much more serious. They go beyond a single, possibly reversible, error of judgment, to weaken and potentially destroy core features of Anglican identity and essential characteristics of any healthy ecclesial body.

Read it all.

Grateful to the Covenant website at @Livng_Church for publishing my latest summary of the CofE processes around LLF and the serious and deeper questions they raise. https://t.co/6dmXAZWjAn

— Andrew Goddard (@goddardaj) October 4, 2023

The process towards a decision on how to introduce prayers of blessing for same-sex couples inched forwards this week when advocacy groups on both sides of the debate were briefed confidentially.

In a sign that the College and House of Bishops might be coming to a common mind about a way forward, both liberal and conservative campaigners were invited to confidential meetings this week with the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) team.

One pro-LGBT campaigner and General Synod member present, Professor Helen King, wrote in her blog afterwards that the conversations had mostly revolved around familiar concerns: “How best to move forwards, what are the implications of various canons that could be used, how are everyone’s consciences to be honoured, what — if any — compromises would be acceptable?”

But Professor King, who had also taken part in the Living With Difference facilitated conversations last month, suggested that the House of Bishops had yet to “make up its collective mind” and, instead, was still trying to take the temperature of the Church and establish what the response would be to various options.

Read it all.

The process towards a decision on how to introduce prayers of blessing for same-sex couples inched forwards this week when advocacy groups on both sides of the debate were briefed confidentially https://t.co/Q4Pz6NxQKI

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) October 3, 2023

Hours passed. Authorities believe the trio dropped the girls off, then made their way down Highway 61, not far behind Troy Morris. Morris, meanwhile, had pulled over and tried to report his flat tire to the mail service. When that didn’t work, he called Troop M, his highway patrol substation. While he was talking with the dispatcher, a vehicle turned around and stopped beside Morris’ truck. It was the three young men. Norman and Washington remained inside while the driver, Damion Whittley, stepped out and walked up to Morris’ window. Investigators believe he asked for a cigarette or a light. It’s likely Morris had both. He was fond of smoking.

When Whittley walked back to his vehicle, he got a gun. Whatever happened next left Morris dead. Life as they’d known it vanished for the other three men, too, right along with their tail lights as they sped off into the night.

No one can say for sure whether Morris knew Whittley or if Whittley knew him. Most folks around town assumed the motive was robbery. But according to Mark Cochran, owner of Blackwell Hauling, the company that contracted for the postal service, the trucks carried only packages and letters. “No money,” Cochran ­maintains. “Everybody knows that.”

Whatever the motive, Morris’ death was a deeply felt loss, especially at his workplace. Just as calls for defunding police began wreaking havoc on officer recruitment and retention, Troop M lost a career patrolman, a supervisor with 28 years of experience. It also lost a dispatcher. In her last exchange with him that night, the ­dispatcher heard Morris talking with his killer. It was too much. She quit.

Read it all.

"Indifference to life is growing like malignant cancer," writes @kimhenderson319 in our cover story.

Read how one murder in rural Mississippi underscores the nation’s struggle to contain violent crime:https://t.co/pnSfMA3DyR

— WORLD (@WNGdotorg) September 27, 2023

Read it all.

A study just published in JAMA finds that people who stay seated for long hours at work and home are at much higher risk of developing dementia than people who sit less. https://t.co/nfGYd5RgBV

— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) September 27, 2023

This deeply Christian book names and identifies with the holistic way in which Jesus approached people. It draws on “biblical insights, the lived experience of those who struggle with mental health challenges, the insights of psychiatry and the mental health sciences, and the resources of theology”. This makes it a vital resource for all those wishing to support those thus challenged and for those who care for and about them.

Particular features are a useful summary of specific illnesses in chapter one and close encounters with biblical narratives throughout, notably that on Job and his friends. The authors suggest that Job’s struggles were not outside God’s presence, but were “a valid and essential expression of faith in the midst of utter darkness”. This sense of despair is picked up in chapter three, in a reflection on the dark night of the soul as explored by St John of the Cross in the 16th century. Comparison is made with characteristics of a depressive disorder. The difficulty in disentangling spiritual and psychological struggles is named. This difficulty was the research object of the psychiatrist Glòria Durà-Vilà, who was troubled by the over-medicalisation of deep sadness and published her findings in Sadness, Depression, and the Dark Night of the Soul (Jessica Kingsley, 2017).

Read it all.

You’re invited to join @CorinPilling, UK Director of Sanctuary Mental Health Ministries, as he hosts the virtual launch of a new book, Struggling with God, by Christopher C.H. Cook, Isabelle Hamley, and John Swinton.
Register for free online at https://t.co/2Rt6jptgsN

— Sanctuary Mental Health Ministries (@SanctuaryMH) June 26, 2023

The 85-year-old server was eager to kick off his shift, welcoming customers into the restaurant with a hearty greeting: “Irasshaimase!” or “Welcome!” But when it came time to take their orders, things got a little complicated.

He walked up to a table but forgot his clipboard of order forms. He gingerly delivered a piece of cake to the wrong table. One customer waited 16 minutes for a cup of water after being seated.

But no one complained or made a fuss about it. Each time, patrons embraced his mix-ups and chuckled along with him. That’s the way it goes at the Orange Day Sengawa, also known as the Cafe of Mistaken Orders.

Read it all.

With one of the world's oldest populations, Japan faces a pressing national health challenge in dementia. One cafe in western Tokyo is experimenting with new ways to try empower patients by hiring them to work as servers. https://t.co/hDmKAahMyl

— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) September 19, 2023

In What Makes Us Human, the artificial intelligence program GPT-3, along with Iain Thomas and Jasmine Wang, has written a fascinating book at the somewhat fluid intersection of self-help and wisdom literature. Given the capacity of computers today and the cleverness of their programmers, I don’t think we have to be surprised that such a book is possible; I will return to this point shortly. But I would also suggest that the book’s subtitle, An Artificial Intelligence Answers Life’s Biggest Questions, does not tell the whole story. It is not hard to answer the biggest questions. It is hard to provide good answers to the biggest questions. To evaluate the quality of the answers provided by GPT-3, it is useful to have a sense of where they came from.

GPT-3 is a large language model form of artificial intelligence, which means (more or less) that it consumes vast quantities of text data and derives from it multi-dimensional statistical associations among words. For instance, when asked to complete the phrase “Merry . . .” Gpt-3 replies “Merry Christmas,” not because it knows anything of Christmas or merriment, but simply because those words stand in a close statistical relationship in its database. When asked to complete the phrase without using the word Christmas, it comes up with “Merry holidays” and then “Merry festivities.” One of the key features of this kind of program is that its internal operations are almost entirely opaque; it is extremely difficult to determine how the program reaches the decisions that produce the outputs that it does.

What Makes Us Human was produced by a GPT-3 that had been “prompted” “with selected excerpts [elsewhere characterized as “a few select examples”] from major religious and philosophical texts that have formed the basis of human belief and philosophy, such as the Bible, the Torah [sic], the Tao Te Ching, Meditations by Marcus Aurelius, the Koran, the Egyptian Book of the Dead, Man’s Search for Meaning by Victor Frankl, the poetry of Rumi, the lyrics of Leonard Cohen, and more.” (A bibliography would have been useful.) Then the two humans would ask some big question (“What is love?” “What is true power?”) and subsequently ask the model to “elaborate or build on” “the most profound responses.” The book is the result of “continuing to ask questions after first prompting GPT-3 with a pattern of questions and answers based on and inspired by existing historical texts” representing “the amalgamation of some of mankind’s greatest philosophical and spiritual works.”

So when Thomas and Wang note that “We have done our best to edit everything as little as possible,” the disclaimer must be understood within this framework of iterative “engineering” of GPT-3 responses through their own sense of what is profound, a process that would only be undertaken by quite an intrusive . . . editor. In addition, they acknowledge two (more) significant editorial decisions. “In all instances, so as not to cause offense, we have replaced the various names for God with the words, ‘the Universe.’ Our goal is to unite around a common spiritual understanding of each other, and so while our decision may be divisive, we hope you understand the intention behind it.” As it turns out, Thomas and Wang do not entirely avoid mentioning God in their pursuit of unity through making a divisive decision.

Read it all.

What Makes Us Human? https://t.co/9O7HBSCaO3

— Public Discourse (@PublicDiscourse) September 13, 2023

Here, from Sebastian Milbank, in an essay making a counterintuitive but compelling case for Tolkien’s place among the literary modernists, is a useful summary of the argument over the portrayal of good and evil in “Lord of the Rings,” which has been ongoing since the saga first appeared:

The often ferocious response of many critics perhaps stemmed from the apparent anachronism of the book, combined with its massive popularity. It was published in 1954, at a time when literary modernism was dominant and pervading the academy. Modernist writers were obsessed with interiority, broke with prior literary convention, and traded in irony, ambiguity and convoluted psychology. Literary critics of the time were taking up the “New Criticism,” which dispensed not only with the previous generation’s fascination with historical context in favor of close reading, but also with the traditionalist concerns for beauty and moral improvement, which were regarded as subjective and emotionally driven. Spare, complex prose, focused on the darker side of society, was in vogue. Into this context dropped 1,200 pages of Dwarves, Elves and Hobbits in a grand battle of good and evil. They were greeted with the sort of enthusiasm one can imagine.

Edmund Wilson called the books “balderdash,” a battle between “Good people and Goblins.” The book’s morality was a sticking point even for the most sympathetic critics, with Edwin Muir lamenting that “his good people are consistently good, his evil figures immovably evil.”

I’ve read many variations on Muir’s claim over the years, especially once George R.R. Martin’s “Game of Thrones” became a dominant cultural influence, and it never ceases to be puzzling. There are various ways in which Tolkien refuses realism, and his books are in no way gritty or sexy in the contemporary style. But the idea that he wasn’t interested in the territory between good and evil is belied by even the most superficial reading of the story.

Yes, there is a mostly offstage villain, Sauron, whose evil seems fixed; yes, Sauron’s Orcish armies are fairly described as immovably depraved; yes, there is a set of characters who are unfailingly heroic despite various doubts and temptations. But between the “consistently good” and the “immovably evil” lies the zone in which most of the trilogy’s drama takes place — the corruption of the wizard Saruman, the fatal temptation of Boromir, the despair and subsequent redemption of Théoden, the curdled conservatism of Denethor and above all the complicated and tortured relationship between Frodo and Gollum, and within Gollum’s own divided consciousness. The Frodo-Gollum dynamic certainly features goodness and heroism, but not in any naïve way, and it ends with divine providence engineering the world’s salvation (though not its full redemption) through and despite their mutual corruption by the ring.

Read it all.

A while back I wrote some brief thoughts on Tolkien & his possible influence on English stasis. Here @DouthatNYT notes that I perhaps "[undersell] how much Tolkien subjected his own pastoral nostalgia to critique", which is a fair amendment, I think. https://t.co/yKApbFAJhp

— Niall Gooch 👍🇻🇦🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🚅🏏✒ (@niall_gooch) September 11, 2023

Worshippers at one of the churches united with Holy Trinity, Brompton (HTB), have expressed “extreme disquiet” to the Vicar, the Revd Archie Coates, about his stance on blessings for same-sex couples.

At the start of July, Mr Coates was among 27 signatories to a letter, shown to the Church Times, which argued that it was “unlawful, unconstitutional, and illegitimate” for the Bishops to commend the Prayers of Love and Faith. The letter said that they should instead be subject to a process of formal synodical authorisation (News, 7 July).

The signatories included three other prominent figures in the HTB network of churches, including Mr Coates’s predecessor, the Revd Nicky Gumbel. A footnote stated that individuals were “signing in their personal capacities, recognising they cannot claim to speak for everyone that they lead”.

Notwithstanding this caveat, their contribution marked the first public statement on the prayers by members of HTB’s leadership. The Prayers of Love and Faith work was approved in outline by the General Synod in February (Synod, 17 February) and the business is due to return to the Synod in November (News, 22 June).

Read it all.

“As a group of worshippers within the parish we must strongly disassociate ourselves from this letter and we would like you to know that it is causing us extreme disquiet.” https://t.co/eeJK1QqF4J

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) July 30, 2023

In contrast, [Simeon] Zahl argues for what he calls an “Augustinian theory of change.” This one assumes that “human beings are driven not by knowledge or will but by desire. We are creatures of the heart, creatures of love.” He further argues that the human heart is highly resistant to change, often blocking direct attempts to alter it.

To make his point, Zahl asks us to recall a time when we’ve tried to change someone’s mind about politics through rational arguments or—even worse—to talk a person out of pursuing someone he or she has fallen in love with.

Very early in my ministry, I was taken aback by a man who could recite all the relevant biblical passages about the dangers of adultery and the importance of marital fidelity but who sat in my office—with his wife and new baby—waving all of that aside as he told me he was leaving his marriage for someone else. “I’ve fallen in love,” he said, with a shrug that seemed to imply, What is there left to say?

That’s why, Zahl argues, “extracting practical advice for Christian living” won’t overcome fallen human resistance to judgment and law. It’s also why, he contends, Pentecostals—whatever shortcomings they may have—tend to be more effective at seeing lives turned around. “The intransigence of the human heart is the fundamental problem of Christian ministry,” he writes. “The Spirit of God traffics in emotion and desire.”

Read it all.

“At the most cynical time of my life, I found myself undone just by hearing the words of ‘Jesus Loves Me,’” writes @drmoore.

“This I know.” https://t.co/4kvucCC6qD

— Christianity Today (@CTmagazine) August 3, 2023

In leading the church’s youth group, Lie sees these ideas filtering into young people, as the Chinese youth don’t want to socialize with or date non-Chinese.

“I teach teens and young adults that such stigma does not come from God,” Lie said. “I encourage them to interact with people of all ethnicities and who have different skin color, both in church ministry and in social settings, so they can broaden their perspectives, realizing that individuals from different ethnicities are not as they might have thought.”

For Natalisa, the despair over her dark skin only dissipated through a closer relationship with God and a supportive Christian community. “I didn’t dare to develop myself until I realized the value of self-worth in the eyes of God during college discipleship,” she recalled. She joined a small group where friends not only affirmed and accepted her, but also helped her embrace herself as God created her to be.

By viewing herself through a biblical perspective, she was finally able to brush off the culture’s beauty standard. With this understanding, her perspective on herself changed.

She points to Genesis 1:26—“Then God said, ‘Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness’”—as the lynchpin that helped her accept her appearance.

Read it all.

“If the Almighty says I am already perfect when he created me, what more needs to be changed?”https://t.co/S6UeeqK9NS

— Christianity Today (@CTmagazine) July 31, 2023

However, the Edina Community Lutheran Church in Minneapolis created a stir recently by posting part of a Pride Month service that featured a radically modernized take on the faith passed down through the ages — the Sparkle Creed.

“I believe in the non-binary God whose pronouns are plural. I believe in Jesus Christ, their child, who wore a fabulous tunic and had two dads and saw everyone as a sibling-child of God. I believe in the rainbow Spirit, who shatters our image of one white light and refracts it into a rainbow of gorgeous diversity,” affirmed the congregation, which — in the video — appears to consist primarily of aging baby boomers.

“I believe in the church of everyday saints as numerous, creative and resilient as patches on the AIDS quilt, whose feet are grounded in mud and whose eyes gaze at the stars in wonder. I believe in the call to each of us that love is love is love, so beloved, let us love. I believe, glorious God. Help my unbelief.”

Read it all.

I will take comments on this submitted by email only to KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

In recent decades, evangelicals have invested a colossal amount of discipleship, activist, and publishing energy toward promoting “sexual purity” and a “biblical” vision for sexuality. Despite this, the pattern of scandal, abuse, and misconduct by men and male leaders makes clear that the purity movement has not solved the problem of unhealthy sexuality in the church. The #ChurchToo movement and related denomination-specific investigations have demonstrated that “sexual purity” is often a mere façade covering up deeper patterns of wickedness.

The crisis of abuse, dysfunction, and sexual violence in the church is downstream from a theologically deficient understanding of what it means to be male. Specifically, we have perpetuated a hypersexual vision of masculinity. These scandals and patterns of dehumanization have infected the church, not despite the purity movement but in many ways because of it.

It’s time to change the way we talk and think about male sexuality. This sub-Christian view of masculinity creates a culture in which men are allowed to wallow in ongoing sexual immaturity. It shouldn’t be surprising when dehumanizing theology leads to dehumanizing—and consequently sinful—behavior.

Read it all.

“If our script of masculinity has become so sex-centric that it excludes Jesus, perhaps it’s due for a revision.” https://t.co/pYUp5X4lIu

— Christianity Today (@CTmagazine) July 17, 2023

“Although [Freire]’s early work was understandably rooted in an almost exclusive concern with class, many of us realized that it had theoretical shortcomings in dealing with the central issues shaping the multicultural debate,” explained Freire’s closest American collaborator, Henry Giroux. “Many of us began to expand the notion of social justice to include a discourse about racial justice. That is, justice could not be taken up solely in terms of the ownership of the means of production, or strictly around questions of labor or the division of wealth. These were very important issues, but they excluded fundamental questions about racism, colonialism, and the workings of the racial state.”

Echoing Marcuse’s redefinition of the proletariat—the white intellectuals united with the black underclass—Freire’s American disciples developed an elaborate framework for categorization and subversion of the ruling order. Their primary pedagogical strategy was to pathologize white identity, which was deemed inherently oppressive, and radicalize black identity, which was deemed inherently oppressed. In the academic literature, this technique is sometimes referred to as “revolutionary pedagogy,” “critical multiculturalism,” or “decolonization,” which entails ridding the education system of the repressive influence of “whiteness” and infusing it with the liberating influence of “blackness.”

Peter McLaren, another Freire disciple who worked in tandem with Henry Giroux, laid out the mechanics of how this new pedagogy of revolution would work in practice. American teachers and students, McLaren argued, must “[break] the imaginary power of commodified identities within capitalism” and “construct sites—provisional sites—in which new structured mobilities and tendential lines of forces can be made to suture identity to the larger problematic of social justice.”

Read it all.

Stalin once said that “the ‘production’ of souls is more important than the production of tanks,” and today we see his words have come to fruition. | @realchrisrufo https://t.co/DSM9ZfcPNx

— First Things (@firstthingsmag) July 18, 2023

…can A.I. invent?

Legal scholars, patent authorities and even Congress have been pondering that question. The people who answer “yes,” a small but growing number, are fighting a decidedly uphill battle in challenging the deep-seated belief that only a human can invent.

Invention evokes images of giants like Thomas Edison and eureka moments — “the flash of creative genius,” as the Supreme Court justice William O. Douglas once put it.

But this is far more than a philosophical debate about human versus machine intelligence. The role, and legal status, of A.I. in invention also have implications for the future path of innovation and global competitiveness, experts say.

Read it all.

AI seems to have a limitless bag of tricks. But can it invent?

A group of legal experts are now pressing patent agencies, courts and policymakers to address that question. https://t.co/zq9yWs8soY

— The New York Times (@nytimes) July 15, 2023

The key questions raised by this majority view are as follows.

First, on what issues are they proposing that it should be possible for those in the Church of England to disagree? Does this, as the context suggests, include the matters that are currently under dispute in the Church of England, namely, the nature of marriage, the proper context for sexual activity, and what patterns of personal life should be expected of the clergy?

If it does include these matters, on what basis do the majority of the bishops hold that it is legitimate for Christians to disagree about them? To use the traditional theological terminology, on what grounds can these matters be said to be adiaphora?

Secondly, what would a ‘generous theological, ecclesial and pastoral space’ mean in practice?

Is this code for saying that the teaching of the Church of England should be altered to officially encompass the view that same-sex marriages and same-sex sexual relationships are in accordance with the will of God, that the Church should provide recognition and liturgical affirmation for same-sex relationships (including same-sex marriages) and that clergy should be allowed to be in same-sex relationships?

Read it all.

We may subjectively dislike what God has said, but true Christian humility lies in accepting what God has said and acting upon it anyway' Martin Davie https://t.co/EUCULJ0Bk1 #anglican #marriage #theology #sexualethics #anthropology #scripture #religion #uk pic.twitter.com/WyjgnobT0k

— Kendall Harmon (@KendallHarmon6) February 10, 2023