“Everyone thought that he was a Muslim, a Pakistani, or someone with dark skin,” says Titio-Maria Sesay, a teenager who lives in Oslo, “but he was Norwegian and he did this to his own people.”
In Oslo and throughout the nation, flags remained at half-mast in morning for the 92 so far confirmed dead. Despite the drizzling rain, crowds formed along the intersections leading to the bombed-out square where police said a powerful car bomb smashed windows and ignited fires in government buildings that included the prime minister’s office. The explosion killed seven and wounded more than a dozen.
“At first, I thought it was thunder,” says Mina Bonful, another teen from Oslo who felt the bomb rock her home. “I’m still shocked.”
It is almost too difficult to comment on this.
This has happened in a country which is renowned for trying to stay out of other people’s wars, and hosts the Nobel peace prize (although they have sent troops to assist the UN peacekeeping effort in Afghanistan). Yes there are tensions re immigration etc as here in the UK but that can never be used to justify this kind of behaviour.
And what has not been said is this…and it is maybe why I am the first to comment on this….this guy, according to the Norwegian police had links to fundamentalist Christian websites apparently.
He sounds as though he has a similar profile to the guy behind the Oklahoma bombings….
Whatever we think or say or may pretend otherwise….this a pronlem that we are part of and we have to challenge, root out and stop wherever we can to prevent before similar incidents happen elsewhere.
I repeat…this is our (byt which I mean Orthodox Christianity’s) problem. Apartheid, The Klu Klux clan, the Orange Order in Belfast, Glasgow and here in Liverpool..all historically have their roots in Calvinist Reformed Protestant pseudo-evangelicalism albeit mixed with right wing politically ideology…a toxic poisonous mix if ever there was one.
I remember watching the film “Mississippi burning” a number of years ago. There was a scene where there was a lynching of a young black guy and he is surrounded by KKK members on horseback waring hoods and holding torches ..I can remember silently asking God “where were the Christians to stop all this happening”….and I can remember to this day being forcefully struck straightaway, by the thought “Phil…who do you think are under the hoods?” I had to battle back tears of shame for the remainder of the film.
When are we going to accept that we need to challenge this kind of stuff whenever we see it and not think it is mere “political correctness” gone mad? Yes, of course there are issues that need addressing re immigration policies etc but I am with Edmund Burke on this…evil does prosper when the good..especially the good in the church.. say..and do..absolutely nothing!
#1 The Northener
You need to know and be clearly assured that none of the things you are talking about have anything to do with Christ or His people. Not do those who try, like the British National Party, to jump on the bandwagon.
I spend a lot of time with Norwegians and in Norway – we need today to pray with and for them.
Comment #1 is riddled with too many factual errors to which to respond, but thankfully he speaks for himself only, anyway.
Here’s an actual balanced, substantive, and sensible piece on the whole “lookie at the Christian fundamentalist” meme:
http://www.getreligion.org/2011/07/the-atlantic-has-the-terrorist-all-figured-out/
Best for me to respond to the actual story.
God bless Norway and its people! My heart goes out to them.
Ah — thanks Pageantmaster, I hadn’t seen your response before I posted mine.
Prayers with Norway, the victims and their families.
Sarah
I think most of us realise that this guy is not an authentic “Christian” – surely there are many on both the “fundamentalist evangelcial” and “liberal” category who fall into that category.
Pageantmaster – we too have family friends in Norway. All of us hold them very much in our prayers. But there will people who do think this guy is “one of us” and this kind of theology is still evident in some extreme areas of the “church”.
What you appear to omit to mention is that in a missional sense, the rest of the world looking on think he is a Christian..and an evangelical Christian of some sort…of course his views are all over the place..but in there somewhere is some “Christian” theology…albeit of his own making.
You also were unsurprisingly reticent to be drawn on the contribution of certain elements (though by no means all) of within the Dutch Reformed Church and the more conservative elements of the Southern Baptist Church with regard to apartheid and the activities of the Klu Klux Clan. Hiding behind “there are so many factual errors etc” is somewhat blase to say the least.
You and I may know he has nothing to do with Christianity but try telling that to the average man or woman on the street at the moment.
RE: “You also were unsurprisingly reticent to be drawn . . . ”
Agreed — not really surprising at all for Pageantmaster not to respond — best not to answer a person “according to his folly.”
The problem is Sarah that we allow these people to frequent the “fringes” of the church without challenging them, to our follly..or maybe that seems too much like hard work.
#5 Northener
Once again, this man has nothing to do with Christianity – evangelical, liberal or any other.
[blockquote]You and I may know he has nothing to do with Christianity but try telling that to the average man or woman on the street at the moment.[/blockquote]
May I suggest that as a Reader in the Church of England, that you do just that, just as I told you in #2 although you don’t really seem to have read the link and taken it on board.
If you had hung around here for a bit, rather than arriving with a number of pre-baked notions as to what people here might think, myself included, it might be a better idea. You would also have found out what I think of Westboro church.
You say that you arrived here from a link on Fulcrum. Do your views represent those of people in Fulcrum like +Graham Kings, Elaine Storkey or Stephen Kuhrt for example? Or do people have the right to varying opinions and the right to express them themselves?
I don’t know much about the Dutch Reformed Church, or Southern Baptists for that matter, but very much doubt that they advocate murdering people on Norwegian islands, which is what this thread is about, and the need for prayers for the Norwegians at this time.
You need to be very clear that this sort of thing has nothing to do with Christians of any sort, and be prepared to say that clearly both in your comments here and when speaking to the ‘man on the street’. Otherwise you give credence to the mischaracterisation.
Firstly PM, please may I be kind enough to point out that you do not “tell me” anything. As far as I was aware this is a community of people of equal status. Please advise, persuade..but “tell…?” No.
Isn’t this the problem with a number of more Reformed conservative evangelcals…that they take the moral high ground without having the permission to do so.
Also it would be pretty difficult for Southern Baptists in USA to frequest Norewgian islands in the 1950s/60s, but it is more than likely, highly probably in fact, that a number of them did consent, support and actually take part in the murder of innocent (and Christians many of them) black people in Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama etc as members of the Klu Klux Klan.
Dutch Reformed church leaders condoned racial segregation for years in South Africa and there may be some even today who would like things to return to how it was a number of years ago.
I think you should read up on your history a bit…or maybe rent out “Mississippi Burning” on DVD and let me know what you think.
As for Elaine Storkey et al my views are very much in line with theirs. Elaine’s husband is an eminent Christian sociologist and would have deep concerns about certain aspects of what goes on unchecked in some churches today.
As for this guy not being Christian he has been quoted, with a much fuller and more accurate quote than Sarah’s friend misquoted before, in a reputable paper here in the UK today that “he always votes for the conservatives in church elections” His own words…not mine!
Follow Sarah’s advice and go to the Get Religion link. Look especially at comments 16 and 45 to read his views of Christianity in his own words. This is the key bit I have seen:
[blockquote]It is not required that you have a personal relationship with God or Jesus in order to fight for our Christian cultural heritage and the European way. In many ways, our modern societies and European secularism is a result of European Christendom and the enlightenment. It is therefore essential to understand the difference between a “Christian fundamentalist theocracy†(everything we do not want) and a secular European society based on our Christian cultural heritage (what we do want).
So no, you don’t need to have a personal relationship with God or Jesus to fight for our Christian cultural heritage. It is enough that you are a Christian-agnostic or a Christian-atheist (an atheist who wants to preserve at least the basics of the European Christian cultural legacy (Christian holidays, Christmas and Easter)).[/blockquote]
If I may, my wife is Norwegian, so we’ve been following this nasty business fairly closely over the last days. Breivik, in his manifesto, explicitly states that his “movement” is culturally and not religiously Christian. His ideal, as the poster above has already noted, is a restored Christendom. He is a nationalist first and foremost, and has no issues with atheism, Odinism, or a host of other “European” possibilities. Apparently, although this is from wikipedia, and needs to be treated carefully, his is both Pro-Israel (sounds conservative) and pro-gay (sounds liberal).
We have a picture of a complicated, deluded and probably sociopathic individual who likes the trappings of Europe’s golden age under Christendom, but clearly isn’t attached to the faith component, as is demonstrated by both his actions and by his own words.
So no, given the above, one can’t really call him a Christian conservative or fundamentalist.
It goes without saying that our prayers are for Norway and her citizens at this time.
those are very good points. Liberals would probably accept this man’s beliefs quoted in #10 (although of course not his actions) as Christian, however orthodox evangelicals, anglo-catholics etc would not.
Just to emphasise, in #12 I am not suggesting that any christian, liberal, evangelical or otherwise, would react with anything but horror at the actions of this lunatic in Norway.
The suggestion seems to have been made by Northener, in the last sentence of his post #9, that there is some connection between this man and what Northener labels “conservative” Christians. My point is that this is clearly incorrect (and I am surprised that Northener would go there, quite frankly).
It is hardly an intellectual response to suggest that, because some homocidal maniac attaches himself to the beliefs of a particular group (whether of the left, right or in-between) without any endorsement from them, that they are somehow responsible in the slightest for his actions.
Michael, I am not suggesting that this man has connections with “conservative” Christians.
However, you remain deafeningly silent about the contribution that some “mainstream” and they were mainstream at the time, conservative Christians made to the KKK and within the Dutch Reformed Church re apartheid.
The reason why Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement.pretty liberal guys and girls by your standards so I guess you wish to critique the stance they took, had to fight so hard was that the “mainstream” conservative evangelicals, along with many others, were either wishing them to remain oppressed or too spineless and gutless to “go there” and make any sort of stand often using the argument that the government was ordained by God and could not be challenged and had to be obeyed even when they were clearly out of line with God the standards that God expects and demands that people should be treated by.
Also, apart freom the Ten Boom family and a few courageous others, where the Christian conservative evangelical reformist types during the rise of Nazism both before and during the war. I saw a disparaging remark from someone on here the other day re the great Lurtheran pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer, one of the few Christian leaders of any denomination, Protestant or Catholic, orthodox evangelical or liberal to make any sort of principled stand against the rise of Hitler. He paid for it with his life. Some of his writings are amongst the powerful and poignant you will ever read. Where were all the other Christians around that time. Either complicit in agreement or cowering in fear I expect.
Also with reagrd to PM I am delighted that you do not in any way agree with Westboro Church…but I have not hear you say that they should not be allowed to go by the name of “Church”. They clearly see themselves very much as a church, and part of the church, and so does the outside world. To say simplisitically that that is OK because you and God decree otherwise is not very satisfying intellectually.
And Michael..as for your comment elsewhere that “educated people” don’t do this sort of thing, I know and PM abhor the National Front, but its UK leader is Oxbridge educated…in fact several really nasty pieces of work have emanated from Oxbridge down the years, so to even imply that allegedly “educated” people are a better class of people who would not go in for this sort of stuff is complete and utter rubbish.
There are these unpleasant types of people in all classes of society,,,educated and “working class”, which is what I guess you were patronisingly referring to when you meant “uneducated”.
#9 Northener
[blockquote]you do not “tell me†anything.[/blockquote]
Hmmm – interesting. Not sure what is going on here, but I am not your mother or your choirmaster.
[blockquote]As far as I was aware this is a community of people of equal status.[/blockquote]
What, you mean like the Primates Meeting and the First among equals?
[blockquote]Please advise, persuade..but “tell…?†No.[/blockquote]
Perhaps ‘inform you of’ would have been a better than ‘tell’.
Meanwhile back to the Scalextrics.
[blockquote] Isn’t this the problem with a number of more Reformed conservative evangelcals…that they take the moral high ground without having the permission to do so. [/blockquote]
Not sure I would describe myself or many of the people here as that; the US church is so far to the left that many of the Christians on this site would be pretty middle of the road in England, even in the diocese of Liverpool.
[blockquote]Also it would be pretty difficult for Southern Baptists in USA to frequest Norewgian islands in the 1950s/60s, but it is more than likely, highly probably in fact, that a number of them did consent, support and actually take part in the murder of innocent (and Christians many of them) black people in Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama etc as members of the Klu Klux Klan.[/blockquote]
I have no more knowledge of this than you do, but there is no reason to suppose that Christians would ever condone or commit murder, and I think it is a pretty serious slur upon your part on the Southern Baptists and somewhat offensive. It certainly would not be part of the Southern Baptist Church today, any more than slave-trading would be supported by the Anglican Church in Liverpool.
[blockquote]Dutch Reformed church leaders condoned racial segregation for years in South Africa and there may be some even today who would like things to return to how it was a number of years ago. [/blockquote]
Again you claim knowledge of what the Dutch Reformed Church was to try to make a link with the murderous actions of a Norwegian Freemason and Nazi who claimed also to be a Christian, but apparently not one who believes in Jesus. You present no evidence that anyone in that church would advocate that today, though you liberally cast your claims far and wide.
[blockquote]I think you should read up on your history a bit…or maybe rent out “Mississippi Burning†on DVD and let me know what you think. [/blockquote]
I have picked up a bit of the history and I have seen Mississippi Burning, but do not see any link to the churches you claim or Christians in particular, and certainly you make no case out that it applies to Christians or these churches in the current United States.
I did not reply because it seemed like another red herring from you on a completely unrelated thread about Norway. I do not get my knowledge of US Christians today from Mississippi Burning, any more than I get my knowledge of the modern Irish Catholic Church from films about IRA bombers, or about modern Russian Orthodox Christians from Doctor Zhivago, or indeed about Liverpool Anglicans from Amazing Grace.
[blockquote]As for Elaine Storkey et al my views are very much in line with theirs. Elaine’s husband is an eminent Christian sociologist and would have deep concerns about certain aspects of what goes on unchecked in some churches today. [/blockquote]
Elaine and her husband can speak for themselves, as can the other members of the Fulcrum leadership team. I doubt if they would engage in the sort of assessment of churches and countries along the lines you have, which comes across as caricature verging on grandstanding. I think you should be careful of making such comments about other churches and other groups of Christians.
Moreover I think you should consider correcting rather than encouraging such mischaracterisations which may be erroneous but based on ignorance in a non-Christian, but extremely disturbing to hear coming from a lay minister in the CofE.
[blockquote]As for this guy not being Christian he has been quoted, with a much fuller and more accurate quote than Sarah’s friend misquoted before, in a reputable paper here in the UK today that “he always votes for the conservatives in church elections†His own words…not mine![/blockquote]
In many North European countries with state or former state churches, people have a vote and sometimes are taxed according to the church their family came from, unless they change their status. Hence all sorts of secular voters make decisions for the Church of Sweden. I don’t know what the position is in Norway. Whatever he says about being a Christian, it does not mean that on any definition he is one, particularly where as has been pointed out above, he claims that one does not need to believe in Christ, surely a rebuttal of his claim to be a Christian. I think it is important that all Christians at this time make the distinction rather than encouraging the prejudice to become established that there is any compatibility between this man’s actions and beliefs and those of Christianity and Christians.
Robert Mugabe saying he is a Roman Catholic does not make him a Christian, nor does Norbert Kunonga saying he is an Anglican bishop make him one.
Just thought this was of relevance to the conversation.
“And I think we christians should remember that, in the scheme of things, it’s only a little while ago that we were more than happy to go on crusades to the East so as to kill the indigent population. More than that, we killed people in our own country simply because they favoured a slightly different version of christianity — and we did so in horrendous ways … burning, disembowelling and so on. Even today, we have acts of violence between catholics and protestants in some areas”
No, this is not from me, but from a very intelligent yet ordinary lady called Sue commenting on the BBC news website,one of hundreds of posters, a large percentage of whom are of the opinion, albeit misguided that this guy was a christian and not very impressed by it either.
I am not really looking forward to work tomorrow as I guess several people may express similar comments – I am seriously hoping that the more “intelligent” amongst them are not lining up with a “if your God is so omnipotent how come he didn’t stop all this misery and mayhem and evil then – especially as the guy was claiming to be on his side!” It will be a valid question…hopefully it doesn’t come my way but it may well be a question that others may be asked over the next few days. I just hope that if we do get asked such questions we are not too trite or glib in our response.
I for one am glad he has been taken alive and didn’t commit suicide as these people usually do. I want to hear what motivated him and why he did it and exactly what sort of political and religious beliefs he actually held. From what we are hearing, we may find out more over the coming days and it could be quite revealing.
#14 Northener, I see while I was typing that you have responded to Michael. If I may comment on one or two things:
[blockquote]I am not suggesting that this man has connections with “conservative†Christians.[/blockquote]
No, but you have suggested that the theology of some extreme Christians supports that of this murderer, and you go on to suggest therefore that we should address such Christians in relation to their theology, which presumably extend to committing murder or ethnic cleansing. You have not established this, although you have named US churches and large ones at that.
I agree that education is not necessarily related to conduct, although one would hope that a Christian education and upbringing, which need not be in a rich home rather than a poor one, would have some benefit, even if members of the CofE are no longer encouraged to send their children to CofE churches thanks to the Bishop of Oxford, ABC and their ilk.
I will leave the rest to Michael, although I think my prior comment covers most of the bases.
Good grief, we are now off on the Crusades. I have trouble keeping up with your rabbit-trail arguments Northener, and it is time for bed. Night night.
PM..I am under no illusion whatsoever as to the fact that the wealth of Liverpool was largely based on the slave trade. I am sure the wealth created by those around the Bishopsgate area has recently had the tine of a filthy lucre about it or hadn’t you noticed?
It took John Newton many years after he became a Christian to actually believe that the slave trade was wrong, and quite some time before he actually campaigned against it. To his credit though he did implore William Wilberforce to keep on going when he was tempted to give up fighting the reactionary forces and vested interests, not to mention huge financial rewards within his own party intent on keeping the slave trade a going concern.
I think you may find the difference is that we have publicly repented as a city for what took place and the leading voice in that was Bishop James Jones…that does not lessen or condone anything that went on. Also, how you can possibly watch Mississippi Burning and see no evidence of the involvement of church members almost defies belief. Did you fall asleep half through the film by any chance?
But PM those members of the Dutch Reformed Church who supported and condoned aparthied were “believers in Jesus” weren’t they? They recited their belief in him as part of their creed on a regular basis didn’t they. They used certain verses from Scriture to justify segregation on racial grounds didn’t they and encouraged their members to do the same without expecting any critical response didn’t they?
And as a member of the church, also lay I presume, you appear to spend a fair deal of your time casting not far off slanderous assertions of others who. persih the thought, may not fit what you deem to be “acceptable theology” especially if they are even the slightest bit “liberal” as if you are the accepted arbiter of what acceptable theology is or should be. Other people are entitled to a different viewpoint from yours and fully entitled to hold it.
Your typicallly mean spirited, spiteful and ungracious comments regarding Dr and Dr Storkey are very being a case in point. You appear to be unable to grasp that many, many people have been inspired and blessed by their teaching and their ministry and are hugely grateful to God for them.
#17 is “send their children to CofE church schools”
[blockquote]I am not really looking forward to work tomorrow as I guess several people may express similar comments – I am seriously hoping that the more “intelligent†amongst them are not lining up with a “if your God is so omnipotent how come he didn’t stop all this misery and mayhem and evil then – especially as the guy was claiming to be on his side!†It will be a valid question…hopefully it doesn’t come my way but it may well be a question that others may be asked over the next few days. I just hope that if we do get asked such questions we are not too trite or glib in our response.[/blockquote]
Matthew 5:16
Perhaps what you might not be looking forward to may turn out to be an opportunity to explain what your Faith is all about, and why it has absolutely nothing to do with the beliefs of the Norwegian bringer of death, but is about life, and life in abundance?
The question of why does God permit such things is as or more difficult. I am reading a new book by Bishop Michael Baughen on just this question.
#19 Much seems mean spirited in your comment Northerner, not to say ad hominem.
“Your typicallly mean spirited, spiteful and ungracious comments regarding Dr and Dr Storkey are very being a case in point.”
I have made no such comments, but merely doubted that they shared yours. I have a lot of time for Elaine Storkey.
PM
deep sigh…
I was brought up in a Christian home but mercifully had parents enlightened enough to send me to a state primary and secondary school.
My own daughter however attends a C of E school, (we did look at other options in our area including state schools) where the evangelical female incumbent is far from “liberal”, and who in conjunction with a very committed Head and deputy Head have ratcheted up the christian input considerably over the last five years.
A solely sheltered Christian education with very little contact with the outside world is not always healthy…especially in terms of evangelism…You may know a lot about your faith but be taught correspondingly little about understanding and appreciating anyone who does not come from your particular background, who does not think the same way as you do, or how to communicate with those same people in a relevant and meaningful way, given that they might not have had the privilige of hearing about Jesus at all in any way.
I for one learnt so much about what non-Christians truly think of the God, Jesus and the church from my non Christian friends and am truly grateful for it and value the time I have spent listening to them. I am sorry you see the need to denigrate such an education, but not in the least bit surprised.
And there you go again…yawn..it is getting quite boring …having yet another go..this time at the Bishop of Oxford, on top of the Bishop of Salisbury…Elaine and David Storkey…myself…at least Rowan Williams hasn’t been mentioned for a while but it is surely only a matter of time.
I too think it is high time for bed…Good night,
PM
I am deeply sorry…I misread totally your comments re Elaine Storkey..I do sincerely apologise.
I am very tired and it is time I went to bed I think. Please disregard the comments re the Storkeys in my last post..although I do find the very negative comments about others, especially comments towards some Bishops not very pleasant.
I was very disappointed at the way Elaine Storkey and other Fulcrum supporters were treated by Wycliffe College. I do know that people in my own Diocese were involved in that and I have expressed my concern to them on occasions.
#23 Not a problem – do say hi to the Fulcrum leadership team and Bishop Kings if you speak to them.
Huge prayers for the people of Norway. After Oklahoma City and 9/11, we know how they feel, on the whole. But this
“Though the bombing jolted Oslo, emotions are particularly raw over the camp shooting since many of the victims are believed to have been in their teens”.
The systematic killing of children or anyone is no Christian act. And I don’t care what the killer calls himself. I could call myself an alien from Mars but that doesn’t truly mean I am one. Those who can separate the forest from the trees, and are not trying to use the killer’s words to advance a secular or political agenda, know that and know it very well. I hope the man is locked up, the key thrown away, and given no more attempts at sound bytes. The only words he should speak out loud now are to his family(if they even want anything to do with him) and his lawyers. There is no excuse for what he did.
Pageantmaster: you are well advanced (far beyond me) in the spiritual fruit of patience.
Northener: less is more. Make your points in 40 words or fewer. Play the ball, not the man. And no, we are not all equal on this site. Sarah is the undisputed Magna Mater.
KMH1
I shall try the 40 word rule -but does it apply to everyone or just me? Come on, play the ball now….
Bookworm,PM and others do also err in this matter…
There 39 words…How did I do?
#17
PM
I understand where you are coming from but I am not afriad of sharing my faith as you strongly imply – it would depend on who is talking to me ands how they are feeling about things. Of course I will try and explain that this guy is no Christian in my view but yes, I would consciously and dleiberately desist from a full blown attempt at using this situation to evengelise him/her, unless of course, I felt that the Pauline injunction to “make the most of every opportunity” was appropriate for that person at that particular time.
I still recoil now, some 15 years on, from the misguided attempts by the vicar at my grandmothers funeral, deciding that this particular devoted church member and faithful parishioner’s funeral was not the time to celebrate her life and faithfulness to God, but to take the approach of “let’s hit these unsuspecting grieving folk with the gospel shall we”. He hardly mentioned my grandmother at all throughout most of the service. It is probably one of the only funeral I have gone too were you would be hard pushed to know whose funeral you were actually at….my Nan’s or Jesus’…the latter name was mentioned regularly and fulsomely..the former very sparingly. I know that in good John The Baptist style “He must become greater I must become less” etc, a teaching my Nan modelled throughout her life, but this debacle was both ridiculous and insulting to her life and memory, not to mention her family, friends and neighbours, most of whom left the church, battered and bruised, thinking, or even saying in some cases “well what was all that about?”
I still remember having to calm down some of my non-Christian family members who were furious over the crass insenstivity of the whole affair.
It is not always appropriate where death and grief are in the mix, whether witnessing to a work colleague or leading/speaking at a funeral to turn turn everything into an evangelistic opportunity. There are occasions when a pastoral mode rather than a preaching/teaching a is far more effective a way of evangelising.
Sorry kmh1..well over 40 words..I must remember to try and play the ball!
#20
Ah..Michael Baughen..a true Bisto moment!
One strongly conservative evengelical Bishop I could happily spend all day in the company of.
I well remember Bp Michael being the host and guest speaker when he was Bp of Chester (and a fine Bp of Chester he was too) at a Prom Praise concert with the All Souls Orchestra at the Liverpool Philharmonic Hall many moons ago.
Has anyone heard where Bp Michael stands by the way on the AMiE issue. I notice that he was a glaring omission from the 2006 Evangelical Covenant..”Here I stand” declaration thingy if my memory serves me right, unlike Messrs Stott and Bewes, his fellow former All Soulers, who both merrily trotted up and signed on the dotted line…
Is he perchance one of the many people not mentioned. apart from the five Anglican named English Bishops and several other usual known suspects aka Coekin, Perkin et. who constitute this august AMiE Sterring Group/Panel. Does anyone know where anyone can find a full list of the 30 or so panel memers because I don’t recall seeing one published or is their identity going to remain as much a secret as the infamous “Southwark Three” I wonder?
It is just a hunch, but my guess is that Bp Michael may well have a number of reservations about both the nature and modus operandi of AMiE..but I may be very mistaken. Any information on this would be gratefully received.
Hope the book is a cracking read.
This 40 word less is more lark is proving difficult I’m afraid!
Northener wrote,
[blockquote] “However, you remain deafeningly silent about the contribution that some “mainstream†and they were mainstream at the time, conservative Christians made to the KKK and within the Dutch Reformed Church re apartheid.” [/blockquote]
No, I don’t. You haven’t asked me any questions about this. Please think before throwing out accusations.
[blockquote] “The reason why Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement.pretty liberal guys and girls by your standards…” [/blockquote]
You have no idea of what I think about them, so kindly cease jumping (yet again) to conclusions.
[blockquote] “Also, apart freom the Ten Boom family and a few courageous others, where the Christian conservative evangelical reformist types during the rise of Nazism both before and during the war.” [/blockquote]
You clearly don’t know very much about the history of “conservative evangelical reformist types”. I suggest doing a lot more reading about them, and about the rise of Nazism.
[blockquote] “I saw a disparaging remark from someone on here the other day re the great Lurtheran pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer…” [/blockquote]
So what? In case you haven’t noticed, anyone can comment “on here”.
[blockquote] “Some of [Bonhoeffer’s] writings are amongst the powerful and poignant you will ever read. Where were all the other Christians around that time. Either complicit in agreement or cowering in fear I expect.” [/blockquote]
I suggest you do some reading about Christians at that time before making confident assertions.
[blockquote] “And Michael..as for your comment elsewhere that “educated people†don’t do this sort of thing,…” [/blockquote]
I gather this refers to a comment I posted on another thread, which is where it should be raised. It appears to me that you have taken my comment way out of context, but that just reinforces my point about raising it there, not here.
[blockquote] “…which is what I guess you were patronisingly referring to when you meant “uneducatedâ€.” [/blockquote]
As so often, your guess is wrong. Please discuss this on the other thread, in context.
Northener wrote:
[blockquote] “It is just a hunch, but my guess is that Bp Michael may well have a number of reservations about both the nature and modus operandi of AMiE..but I may be very mistaken.” [/blockquote]
Why should he have any thoughts on it at all? AMiE is meant for situations where a CofE bishop acts unreasonably and oppressively to his flock, as happened in Southwark. It hardly need concern +Baughen.
#27: My 40 words suggestion is to do with your *point*. Add grace notes if you wish – provided they are notes of grace, not discords.
#30: “I suggest you do some reading about Christians at that time before making confident assertions.” Agreed. A little learning is a dangerous thing. Ignorance is catastrophic.
#28 The Northener
[blockquote]I understand where you are coming from but I am not afriad of sharing my faith as you strongly imply – it would depend on who is talking to me ands how they are feeling about things[/blockquote]
As ever, I was implying nothing of the sort, just suggesting that when you were not looking forward to the questions you will get today, that it is an opportunity as well as a potential problem, and perhaps something to look forward to.
[blockquote]I would consciously and dleiberately desist from a full blown attempt at using this situation to evengelise him/her, unless of course, I felt that the Pauline injunction to “make the most of every opportunity†was appropriate for that person at that particular time.[/blockquote]
I am not suggesting that you give them a Pauline sermon or run through the Alpha Course with them in 45 minutes, but just answer their questions.
[blockquote]I still recoil now, some 15 years on, from the misguided attempts by the vicar at my grandmothers funeral…[/blockquote]
My goodness, the third funeral you have mentioned and the iniquities of whoever was taking it. You do seem to be remarkably unlucky. I can’t remember going to a ‘bad’ one, but perhaps I do not pay enough attention and look out for the failings of the clergy. As you say your Grandmother lived the Christian life, perhaps she would have approved the Christian emphasis, although it does sound as if the balance was not quite right in this case. Again a funeral is an opportunity to witness, not to engage in bad evangelism and there is no need to read the mourners a long Pauline sermon or race them through the Alpha Course.
[blockquote]There are occasions when a pastoral mode rather than a preaching/teaching a is far more effective a way of evangelising.[/blockquote]
A pastoral mode is always appropriate, but evangelism is not necessarily, in fact rarely, preaching at them, but people do ask questions, and one can only answer them as best one can and perhaps say why it matters to us in our lives, as the Holy Spirit prompts us, and them, but always in His power, not ours.
Hope you have an interesting day.
#29 Northener cont.
[blockquote]Has anyone heard where Bp Michael stands by the way on the AMiE issue.[/blockquote]
Does it matter? I would leave the man alone – he has better things to do I imagine like write books and lecture on them.
[blockquote]I notice that he was a glaring omission from the 2006 Evangelical Covenant[/blockquote]
I have no idea, I don’t know who signed it, nor am I interested. For what it is worth he was long retired as Bishop of Chester and under no obligation to consider signing anything.
[blockquote]Is he perchance one of the many people not mentioned. apart from the five Anglican named English Bishops and several other usual known suspects aka Coekin, Perkin et. who constitute this august AMiE Sterring Group/Panel.[/blockquote]
Again, I have no idea, but suspect that he has better things to do with his time like write books and lecture. Not sure why it bothers you.
[blockquote]Does anyone know where anyone can find a full list of the 30 or so panel memers because I don’t recall seeing one published or is their identity going to remain as much a secret as the infamous “Southwark Three†I wonder?[/blockquote]
No, and I am not sure why it is of any interest to you; it certainly is not to me any more than who the three Kenyan deacons are. I take the same interest in it as I do in the list of the latest ordinations in the diocese of Liverpool, or the list of the officer cadets who have passed out at Sandhurst or the list of graduates from London University.
[blockquote]It is just a hunch, but my guess is that Bp Michael may well have a number of reservations about both the nature and modus operandi of AMiE..but I may be very mistaken. Any information on this would be gratefully received.[/blockquote]
More groundless and uninformed speculation. The man is retired and doing useful work for the Kingdom writing and lecturing. Leave the man in peace.
[blockquote]Hope the book is a cracking read.[/blockquote]
It is – and very helpful. I would recommend reading it and if you get the chance go and hear him speak on it if he lectures on the subject.
It is becoming increasingly clear, as fact emerge, that the Norwegian murderer is a deranged individual whose actions really do not depend upon the teachings of Christianity in any of its modern forms, whether Catholic or Reformed. The bombing in Oslo and the shooting of innocents on the island are reminiscent of Islamist terrorism. The killer became what he hated. Neither any Christian teaching nor any non-violent Muslim is responsible for this. Only the murderer is responsible.
PM
So if Bishop Michael is “retired†and it is nothing to do with him, why is it of such importance to four other “retired†Bishops plus the virtually retired Wallace Benn. It seems to be of real interest to them. Haven’t these guys got better things to do with their time? If only that was the case, but clearly not. Or maybe they have seeing got better things to do, seeing that we have not heard a single word from any one of them..unlike Richard Coekin and Richard Perkins who have said plenty…It is hardly an example of visible, accountable, dynamic, accountable leadership to announce your self appointed oversight and then go to ground, or is it?
If I thought it was some sort of enlightened, equipping form of Episcopal oversight where these Bishops are overseeing and those “below†them are equipped and empowered to carry out their ministry I would be more encouraged but I think it is fairly clear as to who is in charge. It does very much have the have a feel of “the tail wagging the dog†about it wouldn’t you agree?
If it is of nor importance then why all the fuss made by Charles Raven in particular, Richard Bewes, Richard Coekin and Richard Perkins about the launch of AMiE. Charles Raven said something typically Ravenesque along the lines of “it was like seeing the Church of England again for the first timeâ€
Fulcrum have legitimately and reasonably asked for an honest and open conversation amongst the wider evangelical Anglican community about the implications arising from the creation of this “organisation†created at a “meeting†who seemingly have the power and authority to ordain whoever they like, when ever they like!
It is clear from your comments that there are many, including yourself and presumably others, who do not wish to enter into such an honest, open and reasonable debate. Why is this?
[blockquote]Fulcrum have legitimately and reasonably asked for an honest and open conversation amongst the wider evangelical Anglican community about the implications arising from the creation of this “organisation†created at a “meeting†who seemingly have the power and authority to ordain whoever they like, when ever they like![/blockquote]
Well now, I have just checked the leadership team of Fulcrum here. Are you saying that you are a member of it, or a spokesman for Fulcrum, or acting at the suggestion of one of them? If not perhaps you might like to encourage one of them to come onto T19 and ask such questions, and you never know, someone might engage in the questions you believe should be answered.
Similarly I expect they can ask the bishops you seem should be answering your questions anything they wish, by writing to them. I am not aware that any of them comment on or read T19, but one never really knows. I am certainly not their spokesman and do not propose to speculate on their behalf.
The leadership of Fulcrum, if they wish to do so, need not be so coy about themselves engaging on sites like this in honest, open and reasonable debate.
[blockquote]It is clear from your comments that there are many, including yourself and presumably others, who do not wish to enter into such an honest, open and reasonable debate. Why is this?[/blockquote]
For myself, and I suspect others, and probably for Fulcrum itself, I doubt if many of us know much about AMiE so it is rather hard to draw many conclusions at this stage Also speaking for myself, I am considerably more concerned at what is going on in the leadership of my church and of the Communion, than I am in speculating on what may or may not be going on in AMiE or indeed any of the many other organisations and groupings there are around.
#36, sorry, but you’re completely off-topic. This thread was about Norway. Again, prayers for Norway.
“Bookworm,PM and others do also err in this matter…”
Well, maybe so but I consider that “good company”. 🙂 The point kmh was trying to make is probably along the lines of one I learned whilst hanging out for years with the US military–“If it’s longer than a page, the admiral won’t even read it”.
The Northener, don’t sweat the self-appointed blog police. Commenters like you are the only reason I even bother visiting. Maybe the “40 worders” can spend more time tweeting. Wow, this comment has exactly 40 words – what do I win?
Bookworm
I am sorry that you feel this has gone off track, but as you point out, I was responding to somebody else’s comments. Please forgive me, because there is not other forum or place to respond to what PM has recently written. You may wish to look away now….
PM
No, I am not a fully paid up memebr of Fulcrum but find the articles intelligently by many of their contributors balanced, well written and reasonably argued.
You ask why so few Fulcrum members come oin here. Could I ask what kind of reception they would get if they, asis likely , were to disagree profoundly with the views of say yourself maybe, or especially Michael A?
You, and others besides, may well be relieved to hear that I myself am seriously considering stopping contributing to this site. The reason I started was because I wanted to engage with those who disagree profoundly with me on some very seriousissues which the church is facing at present and which we will soon be making key decisions on which will affect us all one way or the other.
I know that this is off topic (sorry again Bookworm) but I have to vote, yes, it is at the “lowest” level but the grassroots is important…
in September on the admission of women to the Episcopate at our Deanery Synod discussion.
Through listening to your magesterial summary of the issues in an earlier thread, and Michael A’s objections and intelligent reasoning as to why Genral Synod might well not vote the same way as Diocesan Synod, I, as a Fulcrum-sumpathising support of the admission of women to the Episcopate, would like to understand more of exactly what concessions opponents would like to the current measure to enable you to be able to “live with it” even though you dislike, maybe even despise it, and still remain within the Church of England and witness to Christ effectively in the future through the Church of England and it’s structures.
How am I meant to find out if I don’t talk to you and engage with you. And even though I will be voting in favour what can I do in discussions with those who are bigger “movers and shakers” than I am.
My Area Dean of the Deanery Synod I am on is a voting member of General Synod and pro the measure. My vicar, as you would expect as she is female and ordained and is in favour of the motion. She is also on Dioesan Synod. The Treasurer of Deanery Synod is from our chuirch and may have some reservations, but is likely to be in favour and is also on Diocesan Synod. One of my best friends, a fellow New Winer, is, in addition, more than likely to be elected as the new Lay Chair of Deanery Synod, and will sit on Diocesan Synod and will meet regularly with the Senior Diocesan Staff Teams and fellow Lay Chairs across the Diocese. She too is in favour of the motion, however her brother, who she loves dearly, is a staunch and devoted Anglo-Catholic!
I say this not to big myself up, but to ask…what can I say to each of these people to encourage them to suggest, at Diocesan Synod level, hthat they consider putting forward reasonably worded amendments which have a chance of being seriously debated and possibly passed in order to help make opponents feel that they are being listened too and that their views matter, and they can remain within the Cof E, even if they do feel somewhat marginalised.
I personally think that there are two amendments that could be suggested:
1. Keep the PEVs. Scrap the Stautory Code of Practice. Reduce the number of Anglo Catholic PEVs from 3 to 2 to account for the number of AC priests who have left to join the Ordinariate, and have one in each Province.
2. Appoint IMMEDIATELY, ASAP two conservative evangelical PEVs, one within each of the two Provinces.
3. Alternatively, review and give serious consideration to the creation of a third Province in England. Identify a suitably large church in the Midlands area (ie not North or South based) and confer on it Cathedral status asap. Appoint a PEV Archbishop for that Province. You would have to decide whether he is Anglo-Catholic or Conservative Evangelical…given the numbers of Anglo Catholic defecting..I know which makes more sense to me. You can then have your own Archbishop, Archdeacons, Area/Rural Deans, Bishops, Priest, Deacons, Readers and other accredited Lay Ministers/Worship Leaders/Senior Pastors and Pastors etc. Organise yourselves as you feel is best and most appropriate. There would need to be discussions across the other two Provinces and Dioceses as to how this would pan out “cross border”etc, but I feel that where there was goodwill this could be workable.
I would be grateful if you could inform me as to other concessions you would like to see and which you feel MUST be included, but please could I make a plea. I do not operate on a soft touch, “give an inch and take a mile” basis. I do expect to be met half way..or at least a third or a quarter of the way at the very least….surely that is only reasonable and not too much to ask?
A straight list of demands will not meet with too much sympathy either. Also a terse…”don’t vote for the measure at all, whether it is diluted down or not” will not do either.
In deference to Bookworm, you may wish to do this on a separate thread or email me personally with your thoughts, concerns and suggestions. I genuinely wish to know. I may not agree with them all, but they will greatly, help, assist and inform my own thinking on the subject considerably ahead of the Deanery vote in September.
This discussion and vote is one where I will actively be taking part and contributing along with many others. I will not be taking part in our Diocesan Synod vote November, but I may possibly be able to discuss with beforehand, and attempt to influence those I know who will be. The same applies on a lesser scale with General Synod vote, which my Area Dean will be voting in.
Your thoughts would bevalued and appreciated.
Apologies to you again Bookworm, and to you PM, because I would like to have discussed the comments re Fulcrum in more detail and why supporters of Fulcrum may not be discussing on here etc, but feel that it would not be appropriate to do this in a post on Norway.
Apologies too to kmh1 because I am fully aware that there is
way too much “more” in this, and not enough “less”. Please be gracious to me…he pleads!
#39 Northener
I asked why the Fulcrum leadership team [rather than members] were coy about engaging on an open forum such as this one where comments are not pre-moderated since they co-authored the statement calling for ‘dialogue’ with evangelicals.
I will think about your comment. Meanwhile you might find it helpful to look through the documents and responses on the Church of England Evangelical Council website here which represents most of the evangelical bodies in the Church of England, including New Wine [although I do not seem to be able to find Fulcrum on there]. They did produced a draft resolution for diocesan synods to consider which I also could not easily find on the main page of their site. Unfortunately they only seem to update their site intermittently.
May I also suggest that you might find a more positive reaction if you post comments on the women bishops alternative provision issue on the John Martin Co-mission thread where we have been discussing the issue [this thread is not the place for it], and the Norwegian comments you have been posting on that thread on this one, although preferably without continually trying to make a connection between Christians and Anders Behring Breivik.
#40
PM
Thank you for your thoughtful suggestions. I m fairly unique in that I am both a New Winer and a Fulcrumite. I think Graham Kings and Ian Paul are at least two others. I will be attending a “Women and Church Leadership” seminar Ian is leading at the NewWine 2011 Summer Conference next week.
I will carry on this discussion on the John Martin Co-Mission thread. Will that be where you post any thoughts re my last comment as I would appereciate listening to your comments.
I will also look at the CEEC paper too and will help ensure that this space is reserved solely for comments re Norway.
Your comments re Christians and Breivik are also duly noted.
Thank you once again for the helpful advice here. It is much appreciated.