homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Purgatory: The Evangelical slide into Fundamentalism (Page 11)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  8  9  10  11  12 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: The Evangelical slide into Fundamentalism
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119

 - Posted      Profile for Kaplan Corday         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I've been away for a week in The Lakes

Imbibing Keswick holiness vibes?
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes, we were in Keswick, Kaplan and yes, the Convention was happening while we were there. We did bump into some people we knew from a previous church (when we lived further north) who were there for the week, but otherwise didn't feel many 'vibes'. I popped down to a morning reflection/prayer session at the 'Keswick Unconventional' strand which used the liturgy of the Northumbria Community - quite daring for Keswick one might think ...

We weren't there for the Convention, but my mum-in-law had earlier indicated an interest in going to some of the sessions, only to forget that it was on ...

She is, I am afraid, beginning to get even more dotty ...

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Come of think of it, seeing as how a Benedictine monk I heard speak once suggested that 'neo-monastic' movements like Iona, The Northumbria Community and others might form part of a wider ecumenical initiative that could ultimately lead to Christian reunification - then it could well be that even Keswick is now on the slippery slope towards ...

(cue creepy music)

DANG DARN DARRRNNN!!!

R-R-R-Rome!!!!

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
[British obsession tangent]Bumped into a couple from our church who'd just come back from Keswick - apparently the weather was shite (and bears shit in the woods). Sorry about that. [/British obsession tangent]

--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)

Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The weather wasn't shite at all. It was showery, but we're talking about the Lake District for goodness sake, that's why there are lakes there in the first place ... [Roll Eyes]

As it happens, we had one or two good days for weather in and amongst. They can't have been looking properly. Or else they were too busy being cooped up in the Convention to enjoy it properly. Either that, or they went a different week to us and did have shite weather ...

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Gamaliel

On the subject of evangelicalism in the CofE, it strikes me, as a total outsider, that since it's part of a much bigger, broader, established religious institution, it's under far more control than American evangelicalism is ever likely to be. No matter how wild and wacky the Anglican YECs get, they still have to accept the structural authority of bishops, archbishops and monarchs who may have no truck whatsoever with their beliefs.

Liberalism claims to be at home with diversity, so I can understand that, but at what point does Anglican conservative evangelicalism reconcile itself to the pluralism of its parent organisation? Conservative evangelical Anglicans clearly see some advantage to belonging to such an organisation, but is it a theological advantage, or is it just a question of convenience?

The influence gained by being part of such an organisation is also influence curtailed. I find it strange, but maybe it's just a matter of weighing up the pros and cons. You gain a little with one hand, you lose a little from the other, and vice versa. It's a big compromise, but compromise sits uneasily with conservative evangelicalism, doesn't it?

[ 06. August 2012, 11:34: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thanks SvitlanaV2.

Let's keep this in proportion. I am not suggesting for a moment that there is a large YEC lobby within the CofE. Of course there isn't. Nor am I suggesting that any significant number of evangelical Anglican clergy hold to this position either. You may find one or two, both at the Reform end of the spectrum and among the New Wine style charismatics, but I would imagine that they are few and far between.

Our vicar is very conservative and quite charismatic but he's certainly not a YEC-ie.

No, the point I was making was that it IS possible to find YEC-ies and dispensationalists and evangelicals with what might be described as 'US-style' beliefs about Israel and so on among evangelical Anglicans, and that this may cause surprise in some quarters.

By and large, I would suggest, most of these people are simply in the CofE because they've come from independent fellowships which have folded up or else because they feel that they should support their local evangelical 'cause' regardless of denomination. If they were to move town they might just as easily join any other kind of church with an evangelical flavour.

As for the influence of Bishops and so on ... I'm relatively new to Anglicanism having spent most of my time as an adult (despite of/because of? my Anglican childhood) out in nonconformist or independent settings.

On the ground, it seems to me, the influence of the Bishops is negligible. Our vicar completely ignores any advice he receives from his bishop, it seems to me and the only Bishops he has any time for are the evangelical ones.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The short answer to your question, SvitlanaV2 is that contemporary Anglicanism is congregationalist (or presbyterian? [Biased] ) in all but name.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
The weather wasn't shite at all. It was showery, but we're talking about the Lake District for goodness sake, that's why there are lakes there in the first place ... [Roll Eyes]

As it happens, we had one or two good days for weather in and amongst. They can't have been looking properly. Or else they were too busy being cooped up in the Convention to enjoy it properly. Either that, or they went a different week to us and did have shite weather ...

They went Wednesday to Wednesday for some reason and, as I said, if you go to the Lake District then what do you expect. They are a bit odd eg: the Mrs doesn't agree with infant baptism and has voiced this view to me and others on numerous occasions although she hasn't to me ever since I said to her to the effect of "WTF are you doing in a CofE parish then?"

--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)

Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Leprechaun

Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408

 - Posted      Profile for Leprechaun     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
The weather wasn't shite at all. It was showery, but we're talking about the Lake District for goodness sake, that's why there are lakes there in the first place ... [Roll Eyes]

As it happens, we had one or two good days for weather in and amongst. They can't have been looking properly. Or else they were too busy being cooped up in the Convention to enjoy it properly. Either that, or they went a different week to us and did have shite weather ...

They went Wednesday to Wednesday for some reason and, as I said, if you go to the Lake District then what do you expect. They are a bit odd eg: the Mrs doesn't agree with infant baptism and has voiced this view to me and others on numerous occasions although she hasn't to me ever since I said to her to the effect of "WTF are you doing in a CofE parish then?"
Does not believing in infant baptism make you unable to appreciate varying weather conditions

Who knew? [Razz]

--------------------
He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love

Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
The short answer to your question, SvitlanaV2 is that contemporary Anglicanism is congregationalist (or presbyterian? [Biased] ) in all but name.

Thanks for your long and short answer.

I understand that individual congregations are quite free to believe what they wish, and that there's often very little sanction for ignoring a bishop or an archbishop. Yet to the outside world, it seems that the CofE is represented by issues that are decided far beyond congregational level. All the public fuss about gay marriage and women bishops, all the media attention given to comments made by particular bishops and archbishops - don't evangelical congregations dislike being represented to the nation in this way? Clearly not.

Maybe the only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about!

When Grammatica talked about the political similarities between English and American evangelicals perhaps she got one thing right; if American evangelicals lean towards dominionism, then English Anglican evangelicals (along with other people in the Cofe) obviously do so too, simply by virtue of being part of a state church.

Are English Anglican evangelicals mostly in favour of disestablishment? Or is this issue avoided? If it's avoided, is this because the issue is genuinely considered to be entirely irrelevant to their mission, or because their inclination towards congregationalism has its limits?

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
My short answer would be, SvitlanaV2, that Anglican evangelicals want both their cake and eat it.

On one level they quite like being part of a 'state church' as it gives them a platform. On another, they don't because it lumps them in with views they don't espouse. One of the reasons, I suspect, why Anglican evangelicals tend to wear their evangelical hearts on their sleeves rather more than, say, Baptist evangelicals where the evangelical position is pretty much the norm and they don't feel they have so much to prove.

I'd also suggest that the CofE looks and feels very different on the inside than it appears to outsiders. But that's true of any and every church.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'd also add that I don't see much evidence of 'dominionism' among Anglicans of whatever stripe when it comes to their attitudes towards any other church - RC, Pentecostal, Methodist, Baptist or whatever else.

I know plenty of non-conformists and Catholics feel otherwise, but it's not an impression I pick up 'on the ground' from individual Anglicans at all.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dinghy Sailor

Ship's Jibsheet
# 8507

 - Posted      Profile for Dinghy Sailor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Are English Anglican evangelicals mostly in favour of disestablishment? Or is this issue avoided? If it's avoided, is this because the issue is genuinely considered to be entirely irrelevant to their mission, or because their inclination towards congregationalism has its limits?

This one doesn't really care, nor do most of the people I know.

We get a few bishops in the House of Lords. Yeah great, but everyone's trying to reform the HoL out of existence anyway. We're officially under the queen, but I've never met her (only her hubby) and AFAICT her headship makes zero difference to my life. We occasionally make a few quid by marrying people who live in the parish, but they'd probably want to get married in our nice building whether or not we were officially the state church.

I've heard it argued that disestablishment would set us free to pursue our mission but I'm sceptical: the Methodists are the closest non-established comparison to the CofE and they aren't exactly doing great. To be honest, my strongest feeling on the subject is that the shrill secularists who claim they're being oppressed by living in a theocracy (which must be like being oppressed by a sheep), should not be allowed to win.

--------------------
Preach Christ, because this old humanity has used up all hopes and expectations, but in Christ hope lives and remains.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Posts: 2821 | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Gamaliel

My controversial use of the word 'dominionism' was influenced by Wiki, I must admit! Obviously, in my attempt to see similarities between the two countries I have to go for the 'soft' definition, which would claim that America and England are both 'Christian countries'. How could any Anglican justify the continued establishment of the CofE and yet NOT see England as a 'Christian country', however one defines it? Why would any Anglican value establishment, yet want their bishops and archbishops to remain silent on certain political matters, e.g. on matters of social justice or, for evangelicals, on topics such as same-sex marriage? If Anglicans value having a 'platform', then they're going to use that platform.

Your comment about English Anglicans wanting to have their cake and eat it is quite telling. I particularly appreciate the thought that Anglican evangelicals may feel they have more to prove than Baptist ones and so are more likely to 'wear their evangelical hearts on their sleeves'.

I accept your point that individual churchgoers often ignore what's going on in the wider denomination. Methodists focus on the congregation and on the circuit, but national situation stimulates much less interest. Maybe that's how our leaders like it. I once complained to my minister that we never got any feedback from Conference, and he said I could read the 'Methodist Recorder' if I was interested.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, for an example of a 'disestablished' Anglican Church in these islands, SvitlanaV2, look no further than across the border into the Principality. The Church in Wales has been disestablished since the 1920s without the sky falling in.

I do think that evangelical Anglicans want to have their cake and eat it, and that is inevitably going to be the case. There is something schizophrenic about Anglican evangelicals to an extent. The same would be true, of course, for Anglo-Catholics. Some ACs are wannabe Papalists and some evangelical Anglicans are wannabe Presbyterians or wannabe Wimberites.

It's an inevitable outcome of the Via Media.

I would suggest that there are similar odd anomalies in all churches and denominations, only over different issues.

Plenty of Baptist churches I know of are far more willing to work with their local Anglican, Methodist and URC churches than they are with other Baptist churches in the same town or city. They always say that this is because they want to work locally regardless of affiliation but the real reason [Biased] is that they either don't like the other Baptist churches in the same city or feel threatened by them in some way ... [Razz]

Of course, I am being cheeky, but there is some truth in that.

You also get anomalies, such as one I recently heard of, where a bloke becomes a minister of another Baptist church in the same city whilst his wife and kids continue to attend their previous church because that's where their friends are ...

Others can speak more authoritively than I can, but my impression of Anglicans is that the vast majority of them aren't really that bothered about anything beyond their own parish or their own particular churchmanship.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Well, for an example of a 'disestablished' Anglican Church in these islands, SvitlanaV2, look no further than across the border into the Principality. The Church in Wales has been disestablished since the 1920s without the sky falling in.



Indeed, but the English ones don't seem in any rush to join them! That's what I find curious!

quote:

Plenty of Baptist churches I know of are far more willing to work with their local Anglican, Methodist and URC churches than they are with other Baptist churches in the same town or city. They always say that this is because they want to work locally regardless of affiliation but the real reason [Biased] is that they either don't like the other Baptist churches in the same city or feel threatened by them in some way ... [Razz]



I can understand that. I've read that some ministers in the USA are advised to look for fellowship and support from ministers of other denominations, because that cuts out some of the competitiveness and bitchiness that comes from interacting with internal colleagues who are all trying to climb up the same greasy ladder....
quote:


There is something schizophrenic about Anglican evangelicals to an extent. The same would be true, of course, for Anglo-Catholics. Some ACs are wannabe Papalists and some evangelical Anglicans are wannabe Presbyterians or wannabe Wimberites.
[...]
I would suggest that there are similar odd anomalies in all churches and denominations, only over different issues.



The difference is that being Anglican obviously presents particular benefits that would be lost by joining some other, smaller church. This seems to be a reality both at the very evangelical and at the very liberal end.

Some scholars say that having an established church undermines the long-term vitality and viability of smaller denominations, because the appeal of being part of a protected and powerful institution always wins out over the advantages of belonging to a 'purer', but more vulnerable and marginal institution. I can see the truth in that. Even disestablished (such as the Church in Wales) churches continue to benefit from having once been established, especially if they retain their imposing buildings, their money, their networks and contacts, their more elevated position in cultural memory.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Probably right. I suspect a lot of Welsh people don't actually realise that the Church in Wales is disestablished ...

And, by all accounts, it seems to be holding its own, albeit on a limited scale, in rural areas whereas the old non-conformist chapels are very much going-to-the-wall.

It can work the other way, of course, the current reaction against the RC Church in Ireland is more than simply a reaction against the paedophile priest scandal - although that will have been an enormous factor - it's down to growing secularisation and a certain amount of resentment against the Church's perceived interfering role for many years ...

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dinghy Sailor:
This one doesn't really care, nor do most of the people I know.

We get a few bishops in the House of Lords. Yeah great, but everyone's trying to reform the HoL out of existence anyway. We're officially under the queen, but I've never met her (only her hubby) and AFAICT her headship makes zero difference to my life. We occasionally make a few quid by marrying people who live in the parish, but they'd probably want to get married in our nice building whether or not we were officially the state church.

I've heard it argued that disestablishment would set us free to pursue our mission but I'm sceptical: the Methodists are the closest non-established comparison to the CofE and they aren't exactly doing great.

You seem to be saying that whether a church is established or not is no guarantee of success. How we define success is debatable of course, but the facts are that the CofE has far more buildings, more attenders, more of a general cultural presence (in the media as among the general public) and more resources, I imagine, than any other single denomination in England. It's hard not to see this as a reflection of the CofE's historical and current status as the established church. Some of these advantages would probably remain were the CofE to be disestablished, but your comment about the Methodists suggests that you feel that establishment somehow protects your church from a potentially undesirable fate. I.e., establishment DOES matter.

My suspicion is that the House of Lords and the Queen etc. matter principally as symbols, not as important things in themselves. They symbolise the continuing presence of the CofE - and in some people's minds, of Christianity - at the heart of national life. While these symbols exist in the background they can safely be ignored, but efforts to remove them are uneasy reminders that the central place of the CofE, and of Christianity, cannot be taken for granted. I think this is why English Anglican evangelicals (not to mention other Anglicans, and even other kinds of evangelical) have little to say about them.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
sebby
Shipmate
# 15147

 - Posted      Profile for sebby   Email sebby   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Probably right. I suspect a lot of Welsh people don't actually realise that the Church in Wales is disestablished ...

And, by all accounts, it seems to be holding its own, albeit on a limited scale, in rural areas whereas the old non-conformist chapels are very much going-to-the-wall.

It can work the other way, of course, the current reaction against the RC Church in Ireland is more than simply a reaction against the paedophile priest scandal - although that will have been an enormous factor - it's down to growing secularisation and a certain amount of resentment against the Church's perceived interfering role for many years ...

YTour analysis in my opnion is spot on.

--------------------
sebhyatt

Posts: 1340 | From: yorks | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
sebby
Shipmate
# 15147

 - Posted      Profile for sebby   Email sebby   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I've arrived very late to this thread so must apologise for not having read all 517 posts.

In my undergraduate days in the 1980s, I remember three things that remianed with me about Evangelicals at the university. Not all of course. but a sizable number. And there was certainly a goodly fellowship of them.

The first was a genuine suspicion about the faculty of theology. The Christian Union would pray regularly for the souls of the dons in that faculty. There was a distrust of those who sought to think critically about the Christian faith and biblical texts. The Professor who taught Old Testament history and religion was particuarly targeted, to his amusement.

The second was an outstanding post-graduate physicist who was awarded his PhD honoris causa as he made some quite amazing discovery. On the Christian faith he was an implacable fundamentalist. It was as if in his professional life everything was up for analysis, but in matters of faith he needed something to cling to.

The third was a girl in the Christian Union who was undergoing a tough emotional time not unconnected with sexuality and illness. She was told by the CU not to see the chaplains, who were believed to be too liberal (one later became Forward in Faith). She followed the CU's representatives' advice; she later committed suicide.

Stange how one remembers these things.

--------------------
sebhyatt

Posts: 1340 | From: yorks | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by sebby:
In my undergraduate days in the 1980s, I remember three things that remianed with me about Evangelicals at the university... The first was a genuine suspicion about the faculty of theology. The Christian Union would pray regularly for the souls of the dons in that faculty. There was a distrust of those who sought to think critically about the Christian faith and biblical texts.

Yes, I've also come across this distrust of analysis and critical thinking. Some (certainly not all though) of my more evangelical friends do seem to be uncomfortable with anything that casts doubt on the Bible being literally true; so science, archaeology, historical / literary analysis might all be seen with suspicion.

I think M Scott Peck's 'Stages of Faith' framework (Wikipedia and my thoughts) explains this tendency well - many evangelicals perhaps don't see anything positive beyond what Peck calls stage 2 faith (uncritical acceptance of authority) so they are reluctant to entertain doubts and questioning. I'm sure plenty of Shippies share my experience of having few friends as keen to talk theology as I am!

--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.

Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I suspect things have loosened up to some extent now, but I certainly recognise that portrayal from my undergraduate days in the 1980s. Could it be that we were at the same university?

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Sorry to cross-post, South Coast Kevin ...

Outside of Ship I've been involved in a lengthy tri-lateral exchange with my brother-in-law and his brother, an old friend from my charismatic evangelical/restorationist days.

My brother-in-law remains very evangelical but much more nuanced and has no issue or beef with any of the critical approaches you've alluded to. Like me, he has no issue with late dates for certain OT books or multiple authorship of Isaiah etc.

All this is astonishing and alarming to his brother who has never encountered the like before and thinks we're both dangerously post-evangelical liberals ...

I'd love to see what he'd make of the Ship as a whole ...

[Biased]

I don't have any issue with evangelicals taking a principled stand on issues having considered the evidence on both sides - ken here aboard Ship strikes me as one who has done just that. There are certainly evangelicals around who can and do engage with critical material and some of them can give it a run for its money.

What does nark me, though, are those evangelicals, some of them in the ministry (either in the CofE or in free churches) who are perfectly aware of some of the critical difficulties and yet who either conceal them from their congregations or treat them like big kids who shouldn't really be exposed to some of this stuff in case it undermines their faith ...

I think it is perfectly possible to remain conservative in theology in broader terms, or even in specifically evangelical terms, without having to be afraid of developments in critical approaches. It doesn't do evangelicalism nor conservative forms of Christianity any favours if it keeps burying its head in the sand ...

Don't get me started on the scriptural inerrancy thing (that IS Dead Horse territory) but it does strike me that inerrantists have had to keep moving the goal-posts as to what they mean by inerrancy in order to cling on to their position.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I don't have any issue with evangelicals taking a principled stand on issues having considered the evidence on both sides - ken here aboard Ship strikes me as one who has done just that.

Hear hear.
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
What does nark me, though, are those evangelicals, some of them in the ministry (either in the CofE or in free churches) who are perfectly aware of some of the critical difficulties and yet who either conceal them from their congregations or treat them like big kids who shouldn't really be exposed to some of this stuff in case it undermines their faith ...

Hear hear again. I think this kind of thing is horrendously deceptive. [Frown]

I know theological studies aren't for everyone but I do wish more people were interested in going a bit deeper into the mysteries of Christianity.

--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.

Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Grammatica
Shipmate
# 13248

 - Posted      Profile for Grammatica   Email Grammatica   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Having read the last five or six posts, I have to say that American and British Evangelicals really do have a lot in common!
Posts: 1058 | From: where the lemon trees blosson | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38

 - Posted      Profile for Honest Ron Bacardi   Email Honest Ron Bacardi   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Grammatica:
Having read the last five or six posts, I have to say that American and British Evangelicals really do have a lot in common!

Well, they are all evangelicals! The problem that some of us have had is in trying to communicate not the similarities but the differences - differences in many things such as how certain beliefs are held with other ones, the lie of the land in matters such as relative numbers, proportions relative to other evangelicals and non-evangelicals, influence, relationship to other things such as politics... Just a few things that spring to mind from past discussions.

What I guess I am saying, Grammatica, is that I sense you are taking certain distinctives from your experience of American evangelicalism and using it as a sort of checklist in examining evangelicalism elsewhere. But that approach will only ever have one outcome, which is to confirm all your suspicions. It won't tell you anything beyond the tautology that evangelicalism is evangelicalism. In practice it is an unscientific approach as it is guaranteed to suffer from confirmation bias. It's OK as a starting point to confirm that we are referring to the same thing. Beyond that, not so much.

--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic

Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:

What does nark me, though, are those evangelicals, some of them in the ministry (either in the CofE or in free churches) who are perfectly aware of some of the critical difficulties and yet who either conceal them from their congregations or treat them like big kids who shouldn't really be exposed to some of this stuff in case it undermines their faith ...


Yes, but you could make the same criticism of clergy in mainstream, left of centre circles as well. A Methodist theologian I know who's absolutely not an evangelical told me it was better for the clergy not to share some of the more challenging theological stuff with their congregations, because they'll probably do it badly and end up damaging people's faith. One of his colleagues, a URC man, (and even less theologically orthodox, so I hear) told me about the frustration of clergy who aren't on the same page, theologically speaking, as their congregations, and who feel unable to express their thoughts openly.

I thought it was par for the course that the clergy in mainstream environments were almost always more theologically liberal than their congregations, but tried not to show it too much. If this is happening to evangelicals as well it just proves that they're now a bit more like everyone else!

[ 10. August 2012, 21:18: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
What does nark me, though, are those evangelicals, some of them in the ministry (either in the CofE or in free churches) who are perfectly aware of some of the critical difficulties and yet who either conceal them from their congregations or treat them like big kids who shouldn't really be exposed to some of this stuff in case it undermines their faith ...

I'm fairly unsympathetic when this comes down to the Noble Lie side of things. On the other hand - whilst not endorsing deliberate concealment, I suspect it's sometimes better not to bring up certain issues unless you then have the time to work through the fallout and assist the person concerned in coming to a new understanding of the faith that incorporates that new bit of knowledge.

That said, these days anyway, in conservative circles I find most ministers to be on the same page, they have their own brand of higher criticism etc. that purports to confirm a traditional view of inerrancy/etc.

Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Grammatica
Shipmate
# 13248

 - Posted      Profile for Grammatica   Email Grammatica   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
quote:
Originally posted by Grammatica:
Having read the last five or six posts, I have to say that American and British Evangelicals really do have a lot in common!

Well, they are all evangelicals! The problem that some of us have had is in trying to communicate not the similarities but the differences - differences in many things such as how certain beliefs are held with other ones, the lie of the land in matters such as relative numbers, proportions relative to other evangelicals and non-evangelicals, influence, relationship to other things such as politics... Just a few things that spring to mind from past discussions.

What I guess I am saying, Grammatica, is that I sense you are taking certain distinctives from your experience of American evangelicalism and using it as a sort of checklist in examining evangelicalism elsewhere. But that approach will only ever have one outcome, which is to confirm all your suspicions. It won't tell you anything beyond the tautology that evangelicalism is evangelicalism. In practice it is an unscientific approach as it is guaranteed to suffer from confirmation bias. It's OK as a starting point to confirm that we are referring to the same thing. Beyond that, not so much.

Your point about "confirmation bias" is a good one.

Nevertheless --

I'm -- oh dear, I can tell right away that I'm going to be shooting myself in the foot here, but please bear with me while I try to blunder toward my point -- I'm looking at the similarities between the two broad groups of Evangelicals, British and American (which, as you say, are bound to exist, since both are called by the same name) and asking myself whether the differences between them are only differences in context and numbers.

So I am asking: Would British Evangelicals act like American Evangelicals, if they had the strength in numbers that American Evangelicals do?

Or to put it another way:

If British Evangelicals formed as large a percentage of the British population as American Evangelicals do in the United States, would they:
  • attempt to control school curricula (i.e. demand revision of history texts, tamp down teaching that incorporates critical thinking, or insist that YEC be taught along with the theory of evolution?)
  • strongly influence government policy on women's health issues (i.e. contraceptive availability)?
  • claim the exclusive right to represent religion in the public sphere (i.e. insist that public prayers be given only by Evangelicals, or see to it that their religious holidays, but no others, are publicly celebrated)?

You're right; that is a checklist. But still, can these questions be asked?

If there were as many British evangelicals as there are American, which way would they vote? Would they vote as a bloc? Would they vote as "values voters"? Do they, in fact, vote as a bloc now? How do British evangelicals tend to vote? Labour? Conservative? Liberal Democrat?You must have polls that indicate the political direction they tend to follow. Or if you haven't got them, ring up somebody who was in Tony Blair's government; I'll bet they've got them.

Since almost by definition Evangelicals strive to increase their numbers, it's worth considering what a Britain would be like in which a substantial proportion of the people were Evangelicals.

Posts: 1058 | From: where the lemon trees blosson | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
sebby
Shipmate
# 15147

 - Posted      Profile for sebby   Email sebby   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And I have to add in all seriousness, that were I not to have experienced the holiness of some quite extraordinary people - including some priests both Anglican (MOTR) and RC - and just seen the evangelicalism of my university days and those oddities that signed up to the Christian Union, I would have thought Christianity a most disgusting and feeble pseudo-philosophy.

I have only to hear their contemporary bleatings to find myself flying to the Hitchen-Dawkins camp.

--------------------
sebhyatt

Posts: 1340 | From: yorks | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Grammatica:

Would British Evangelicals act like American Evangelicals, if they had the strength in numbers that American Evangelicals do?

English people have traditionally voted on class lines. Crudely, the CofE was 'the Tory party at prayer' (Tory = Conservative), but the Conservatives were also the party of the wealthy, of the establishment, and of those who aligned themselves with the establishment. I imagine that at one time, most Anglicans who had the vote voted Conservative, whether evangelical or not.

The Nonconformists (not all of whom evangelical) were loyal to the Liberal party, one of whose goals was to fight for Nonconformists to have the same rights as Anglicans. The decline of the Liberals in the early 20th c. has been connected to the decline of Nonconformity. It has also been connected to the rise of the Labour party, which arose out of the trade union movement. Men with Nonconformist roots were instrumental in this process, hence the quip that 'the Labour party owes more to Methodism than to Marxism'. So Labour was the socialist party.

Nowadays, the class distinctions are still vaguely present, but the religious distinctions have been mostly relegated to folklore. None of our main party leaders could remotely be called evangelicals; two of them are atheists. There may be evangelicals in their cabinets, but it's not something they make a fuss about, so there's no reason for evangelicals to make a fuss about them!

Re your question about what England would look like with more evangelicals - that's hard to say. The politicisation of American evangelicalism isn't something that British evangelicals seem envious of. One or two commentators online mention certain voting trends, but it all seems very subtle, and other factors probably come into play - class, race, local issues. And it's not a given that evangelicals will want to take political power. I read that until the 70s, most American evangelicals wanted to give political shenanigans a wide berth.

(Note that in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland the Conservatives have very little presence. Class and culture definately come into it. I don't know if religion plays a part.)

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by sebby:
In my undergraduate days in the 1980s, I remember three things that remianed with me about Evangelicals at the university. Not all of course. but a sizable number. And there was certainly a goodly fellowship of them.

The first was a genuine suspicion about the faculty of theology. The Christian Union would pray regularly for the souls of the dons in that faculty. There was a distrust of those who sought to think critically about the Christian faith and biblical texts.

I'm not sure how much can be put down to the impact of a few individuals causing short-term and local variations. But, I was at uni in the 1980s as well and committed CU member (small group leader and Secretary/Treasurer as an under-grad and then as a post-grad a small group leader and sort of 'elder statesman' who CU leaders regularly came to for a talk). Our uni didn't have a theology department, but we did have a "oriental studies" department that included archaelogy of ancient Egypt and the Middle East. Two members of that department were, at different times, members of the advisory committee for the CU (a group of 2 academics and 2 local pastors). One of them had written a book aimed at the general Christian public describing the archaelogical background of the OT, being vrey open about the fact that traditional understanding of Joseph, the Exodus, the conquest of Caanan (including the fall of Jerico), the political influence of the Kingdoms of David and Solomon etc are incompatible with the archaelogical evidence. Clearly your experience would have been that such an academic would not be trusted, and certainly not asked to be in a position to advise and assist the CU committee. Whereas mine is the direct opposite.

Part of that would be a simple result of the breadth of Evangelicalism. Our CU certainly had individuals who would have had views of academic study not dissimilar to your experience. We had people with distrust of the chaplaincies (even though we had an Anglican chaplaincy dominated by evangelicals, and an evangelical Methodist chaplain - not to forget a charismatic Catholic chaplain) too; I remember one occasion when I was on Exec that the Anglicans were organising an evangelistic mission and asked us for help along the lines of "how do you go about oganising a misssion?", the CU had had a mission the previous year, and one of our Exec members was adamant that we shouldn't help because that would be "compromising the faith" even by just talking to Anglicans, even evanglelical Anglicans.

Over 7 years involved in that CU I saw some significant pendulum swings on different issues. Attitudes to the chaplaincy groups was warm, cooled and warmed again. Acceptance of charismatic gifts was moderately warm, got distinctly chilly and then warmed again (we never had tongues etc in any main meetings, but in the warm periods it was generally accepted that these were genuinely of God and of benefit to some people). The churches that were most popular with CU members also varied a lot, with a corresponding change in where we got speakers from (usually pastors of the churches members went to).

The nature of university CUs is that being run by students, who in most cases are only available to run things for at most 2 years, they can fluctuate quite wildly in their outlook. Even with a tendancy for outgoing leaders to call people of similar views to leadership, the small number of people available means that there is still potential for relatively rapid shifts in the views of the leadership - a potential that often happens.

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ender's Shadow
Shipmate
# 2272

 - Posted      Profile for Ender's Shadow   Email Ender's Shadow   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by sebby:
In my undergraduate days in the 1980s, I remember three things that remianed with me about Evangelicals at the university. Not all of course. but a sizable number. And there was certainly a goodly fellowship of them.

The first was a genuine suspicion about the faculty of theology. The Christian Union would pray regularly for the souls of the dons in that faculty. There was a distrust of those who sought to think critically about the Christian faith and biblical texts. The Professor who taught Old Testament history and religion was particuarly targeted, to his amusement.

The reality is that many members of faculties of theology have abandoned any claim to adherence to the traditions of the faith. Therefore they turn to the bible to prove what they want to believe. And it is legitimate for us to be, with CS Lewis, highly sceptical of the latest 'mainstream academic view', because we can be certain that in a few years, the fashion will have changed. This is most elegantly demonstrated in the absurd variations in the dating of the gospels over the years. It also offers an insight into the biases of that fashion: at one stage it was assumed that because prophecy is impossible, the gospels must post date the fall of Jerusalem since they predict it. These days it's more fashionable to accept the logic that Acts is written before Paul's death at the hands of Nero, so Luke is before Acts and Mark before Luke, thus pushing dates earlier. The data hasn't changed...

--------------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good.

Please don't refer to me as 'Ender' - the whole point of Ender's Shadow is that he isn't Ender.

Posts: 5018 | From: Manchester, England | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No, but our responses to the data do fluctuate, Ender's Shadow, and this can be almost as apparent in conservative as well as liberal circles - hence the constant moving of the goal-posts on the inerrancy thing ...

@Grammatica, I can see what you're driving at but would suggest that your analysis/pattern forming is rather two-dimensional and needs SvitlanaV2's excellently argued sociological dimension to add a third.

One could argue, of course, that historically in the UK the dominant or most numerous (or state supported) groups did try to dominate and set the agenda - I'm thinking of the very Erastian Church of England during the Hanoverian period or the Puritans during the Commonwealth and Interregnum.

But even then, the issues were not always clear cut. The Commonwealth was at once both restrictive and very eirenic, for instance.

I s'pose my answer to your question would be that IF a CERTAIN TYPE of evangelical gained critical mass here in the UK then yes, we would see similar initiatives to those you describe in the US - attempts to influence school curricula, public prayer etc etc.

But, as has been pointed out here several times already, that particular type of evangelical is just one among various shades and flavours. The same is true in the US, of course, it's just that the more fundamentalist forms of evangelicalism are the dominant ones over there in terms of numbers and clout. Not all US evangelicals are fundamentalists.

@SvitlanaV2, yes, I am aware of MOR or more liberal clergy/ministers who say similar things to some evangelicals in terms of not sharing certain things lest it damage people's faith. My position on this one is similar to Chris Stiles's.

On the whole, I would say that the difference between evangelicals and 'everyone else' is more a quantitative thing than anything else - the degre to which these things are discussed or even acknowledged. Sure, I wouldn't expect to hear the nuances and ins-and-outs of textual critical presented openly from the pulpit at our local Methodist church, for instance - but listening to a few sermons there it is obvious that the preachers themselves have had to engage with this stuff.

With certain evangelical preachers you get the impression that they either haven't come across it at all - which is rather disingenuous of them - or else they've only engaged with this material in order to debunk it using what Chris Stiles has referred to as 'their own versions' of Higher Criticism.

Mercifully, this isn't always the case. I can't speak for CofE evangelicalism more broadly, but in my experience Baptist evangelicals are a lot more open and a lot more prepared to deal with this stuff than evangelical Anglican clergy - who, in this area at least, seem hell-bent on presenting a 'Janet and John' version of the faith.

Perhaps this is because the bulk of the Baptists I've engaged with in recent years have been rather 'emergent' in flavour - having moved somewhat from an earlier more conservative base towards a more post-evangelical one.

This makes me wonder whether that's not a 'slide into fundamentalism' as such but two way traffic - some evangelicals taking refuge in a more conservative approach, others moving in the opposite direction. We've got both things going on at the same time.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Just to add on the political affiliation thing ...

It's difficult to make broad generalisations about evangelical political sympathies and voting patterns in the UK, for the reasons SvitlanaV2 outlined.

But I will try ...

In my experience, every evangelical congregation I've been involved with in any deep or meaningful way - either as a member or as a regular visitor - has contained people who would support any one of the main political parties - and even one or two individuals who were further to the left of the UK mainstream.

On the whole, the more fundamentalist forms of evangelical tend to be more likely to be Conservative - but that isn't necessarily a given.

The bulk, I would suggest, of Anglican and Baptist evangelicals would be soft-left, Lib-Dem or the right-wing of the Labour Party in terms of their political sympathies - but this isn't a given.

It is also possible to come across some at the independent, conservative end of the evangelical spectrum who proudly announce themselves to be a-political and who claim not to vote at all - but I'd say this was pretty rare.

Once or twice I've detected notes and nuances that ring alarm-bells in a 'US religious right' type of way - but only very, very occasionally.

I don't think there's any appetite here, even among very conservative evangelicals to emulate the US Religious Right. Heck, it's not uncommon to hear Pentecostals, Brethren or other very conservatively theological people denounce the US Religious Right.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
A.Pilgrim
Shipmate
# 15044

 - Posted      Profile for A.Pilgrim   Email A.Pilgrim   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
This makes me wonder whether that's not a 'slide into fundamentalism' as such but two way traffic - some evangelicals taking refuge in a more conservative approach, others moving in the opposite direction. We've got both things going on at the same time.

That's exactly what I have been thinking in all the time that I've been following this thread. I think you've nailed it spot on, Gamaliel - at least for the UK.
Angus

Posts: 434 | From: UK | Registered: Aug 2009  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Once or twice I've detected notes and nuances that ring alarm-bells in a 'US religious right' type of way - but only very, very occasionally.

There are two groups who sometimes give indications of heading in this direction.

The first group are the bash-campers, though they generally have a whiggish/Tory Wet flavour.

The second are some of the newer movements, who tend towards a New Tory style of orientation. Having said that being a labour supporter is still not a complete shibboleth in such circles. I can see if the church growth movement makes much more headway they might start heading in the 'family values' direction.

Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So, to judge from what's been said here, there doesn't seem be any one natural home for the 'evangelical vote', because there's no such thing as the 'evangelical vote'.

In terms of 'family values', it seems that the majority of all voters, evangelical or not, seem to expect party leaders who are family men, judging by the kinds of people who get the job. As far as I'm aware, this isn't due to an evangelical campaign against single gay candidates, or against divorced female candidates. Perhaps the country is naturally 'conservative' in certain ways that don't require the intrusion of evangelicalism....

At least some American evangelicals must have voted for Barack Obama, a non-evangelical mixed-race Christian whose father was from a Muslim family! I wonder if British evangelicals would vote for someone from a background like that to become Prime Minister of the UK!!

There's a class and regional component that hasn't been discussed. In the USA, evangelicals aren't found in equal numbers in all states. They're not equally present among all social types and classes. In our imagined 'evangelical UK' of the future, who would these evangelicals be? Is growth more likely among the middle class, or the working class? Ethnic minorities or majorities? Men or women? In the regions or Greater London? Would a new Welsh revival automatically favour the Tories? Are we imagining evangelicalism as a tribal identity among people who don't read their Bibles much anymore, or are we imagining a nation of fresh and eager converts?

All these factors would influence how the people concerned would be likely to vote.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I don't think race is an issue for UK evangelicals. I don't think class is either, but gender most certainly is - honestly I think that UK evangelicals would support a straight man of any class or gender.

I don't think a new Welsh Revival would support the Tories, probably the opposite! All the main parties fail on the traditional evangelical 'issues', but the Tories fail the most on issues of social justice, poverty etc. I think class is the major divider here.

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
In terms of 'family values', it seems that the majority of all voters, evangelical or not, seem to expect party leaders who are family men, judging by the kinds of people who get the job.

To be clear, I put 'family values' in quotes deliberately, as I meant the sort of thing that serves as a proxy for other things entirely (after all, the Christian Right generally builds it's policies on some particular image of the good life). Rather than family values in and of themselves.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
John D. Ward
Shipmate
# 1378

 - Posted      Profile for John D. Ward   Email John D. Ward   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I don't think race is an issue for UK evangelicals. I don't think class is either, but gender most certainly is - honestly I think that UK evangelicals would support a straight man of any class or gender.

I think you mean "a straight man of any class or race".
Posts: 208 | From: Swansea, Wales, U.K. | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I don't think race is an issue for UK evangelicals. I don't think class is either, but gender most certainly is - honestly I think that UK evangelicals would support a straight man of any class or gender.

I don't think a new Welsh Revival would support the Tories, probably the opposite! All the main parties fail on the traditional evangelical 'issues', but the Tories fail the most on issues of social justice, poverty etc. I think class is the major divider here.

I think race is an issue in some respects. For example, ethnic minorities are far less likely to vote Tory than other people - yet black majority churches, which are mostly evangelical, are growing quite fast in comparison with certain other kinds of church.

Class is relevant too, I think. A wealthy evangelical and an unemployed evangelical may have different views about which party will best serve their economic interests. Or are you suggesting that evangelicals vote only on the basis of morality and/or social justice, and never consider the money in their pocket? Considering the oft-repeated connection between Protestantism and capitalism perhaps it would be unlikely if class and money were irrelevant to evangelical voting patterns.

[ 11. August 2012, 17:33: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Grammatica
Shipmate
# 13248

 - Posted      Profile for Grammatica   Email Grammatica   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Class is relevant too, I think. A wealthy evangelical and an unemployed evangelical may have different views about which party will best serve their economic interests. Or are you suggesting that evangelicals vote only on the basis of morality and/or social justice, and never consider the money in their pocket?

In the United States, that would be exactly right, or at least the first part of it would be.

US Evangelicals predominate in the Southern states. These states are characterized by lower than average household income, high poverty rates, high un- and underemployment, lower than average educational attainment, and higher than average rates of divorce, single motherhood, drug and alcohol use -- in other words, by joblessness, poverty, and the social ills of poverty. One would think Southern voters would be concerned about these issues, but that isn't so.

In these states, Evangelicals vote reliably and overwhelmingly Republican, and the issues that get them to the polls are "guns, God, and gays" (and also abortion, and teaching evolution in the schools). From where I sit, these issues are pretty much irrelevant to the voters' actual situation. They are merely symbolic, "culture wars" stuff, but candidates in the South reliably win elections by using them.

"Social justice" issues could be important to Roman Catholic voters in the North, but they are emphatically not a concern to Southern Evangelicals. Even the phrase would strike them as socialistic "class warfare."

Other important issues for Evangelicals include supposed Muslim plots to impose sharia law on the US -- there was recently a big flap over this involving Michele Bachmann -- and "illegal immigration." There's a good bit of nationalism, also, and again, the belief that the United States was founded as a Christian country (meaning, by this, of course, their brand of Christianity). Some believe that US citizenship should be restricted to Christians.

So, yes, they vote their "values" and not their pocketbooks. Of course, Americans don't believe they have anything like a class system*, so voting with one's class would be quite hard to do.


* Americans do have a class system, though. In fact, they're obsessed with class, but in complete denial about it.

Posts: 1058 | From: where the lemon trees blosson | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411

 - Posted      Profile for Jay-Emm     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by sebby:
[qb]In my undergraduate days in the 1980s, I remember three things that remianed with me about Evangelicals at the university. Not all of course. but a sizable number. And there was certainly a goodly fellowship of them.

The first was a genuine suspicion about the faculty of theology. The Christian Union would pray regularly for the souls of the dons in that faculty. There was a distrust of those who sought to think critically about the Christian faith and biblical texts.

Was your experience from 'inside' or 'outside'?
My experience* of it was much more anti-establishment based, (although often isolated instance).
Broadly it was assumed that rather than thinking critically they were parroting the secular line and self advancement. And that they had a distrust of us being taught to think critically about the Christian faith and biblical texts.

*more or less CU side, wishing well for chapel but on CU terms.

Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think you've identified a major Pond difference, Grammatica, we don't have a Deep South ...

At least, not in the way that the US has. We have a disenfranchised under-class certainly, and plenty of pockets of poverty, under-achievement and so on ... but we don't have any equivalent to the Red Neck States.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I am aware, of course, that the South is a more nuanced and culturally varied region than is often portrayed ... before any of our Southern US posters come along and start taking me to task.

I think the influence of the Dust Bowls, the Great Depression and the fault-lines between the Southern and Northern States all have to be taken into account when seeking to understand US evangelicalism and why it has taken on a somewhat different flavour to its UK cousin.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296

 - Posted      Profile for Jolly Jape   Email Jolly Jape   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
originally posted by Grammatica

If British Evangelicals formed as large a percentage of the British population as American Evangelicals do in the United States, would they:
attempt to control school curricula (i.e. demand revision of history texts, tamp down teaching that incorporates critical thinking, or insist that YEC be taught along with the theory of evolution?)

No, because, to most UK evos, these are complete non-issues. They overwhelmingly do not see a contradiction between evolution and their faith, or science and their faith, or the use of critical thinking and their faith.

quote:

strongly influence government policy on women's health issues (i.e. contraceptive availability)?

No. Large numbers of Catholics might, but UK evangelicals are not only overwhelmingly accepting of contraception, but of the idea that God intended sexual activity within marriage to be for pleasure, irrespective of the possibility of conception. Contraception is available free of charge on the NHS, and I don't know of any UK evo group that opposes this. I'm surprised by the suggestion that this is not also the case in the US, though I'm also surprised (to put it mildly) that anyone would ideologically oppose a comprehensive, free at the point of delivery Health Service.

The one issue that would probably unite UK evos in seeking to change the law would be abortion, where overwhelmingly they are opposed to the current practice. Even there, though, I think the majority would like to see a (more or less severe) tightening of the regulations controlling it, and a ban on late-term abortions, rather than a broad-blanket criminalisation.

quote:

claim the exclusive right to represent religion in the public sphere (i.e. insist that public prayers be given only by Evangelicals, or see to it that their religious holidays, but no others, are publicly celebrated)?

I think UK evos would desire that those offering public prayers should be evangelical (which is not quite the question that you asked) and certainly would want more freedom of action for evangelicals to express their faith in the public arena (so no banning of Christmas Carols/Nativity scenes etc from public buildings). But we'll take any holidays we can, I think.

How much like or unlike that makes UK evos to their US co-religionists, I'm not sure. But when I think of a UK evo, I think of someone like ken, Alan Cresswell or Barnabas62 (OK, they are incredibly bright and articulate examples, but I'm talking about their (small p) political views). I guess I'm at the extreme left of UK evangelicalism, being pro gay marriage, believing in ultimate reconciliation, and thinking PSA is a serious heresy, but even I haven't been cast into the outer darkness by my evo church.

--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)

Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Grammatica
Shipmate
# 13248

 - Posted      Profile for Grammatica   Email Grammatica   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I think you've identified a major Pond difference, Grammatica, we don't have a Deep South ...

At least, not in the way that the US has. We have a disenfranchised under-class certainly, and plenty of pockets of poverty, under-achievement and so on ... but we don't have any equivalent to the Red Neck States.

Well, you do have a North, with some of the same dynamics, though, obviously, with many differences also.
Posts: 1058 | From: where the lemon trees blosson | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549

 - Posted      Profile for Dafyd   Email Dafyd   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Grammatica:
Well, you do have a North, with some of the same dynamics, though, obviously, with many differences also.

Very different I believe. The cities of the UK North are largely industrial in a way that I believe is more typical of the US North. If I'm right about the US they're more like Detroit than they are like the midwest. Basically they rose in population with the industrial revolution and then began economic decline as the Tories took apart manufacturing industry and coal mining.

The far right periodically gets a foothold in local or European politics only to regularly lose it in the next policial cycle. But otherwise the big northern cities are solidly Labour. The country and small towns vote Conservative, but that's an entirely different political agenda.

--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams

Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  8  9  10  11  12 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools