Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Headship argument - is it gaining support?
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by leo:
According to this, they quote: had introduced the rule as a compromise after a previous policy banned women speakers altogether.
[/QUOTE]
This is almost certainly wrong. My understanding was that they had no policy at all, and largely invited male speakers because most of the people who agree with the UCCF DB and are church leaders are male. Someone caused a fuss because they thought the CU should have a definite no woman speaker rule, just to make it clear, and this whole kerfuffle was a hapless attempt by some students to steer a middle line. In essence, you could interpret it as an attempt to be inclusive.
-------------------- He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by SvitlanaV2: Karl
Very true. But perhaps this makes it all the more intriguing when those who do congregate in one theological corner. I mean, why should Bristol CU (or any other CU) be dominated by this sort of young male Christian? Is this what you get when you extract the old ladies, the friendly female vicars, the happy-clappy girls, the middle aged liberal theologians, etc.?
(I don't mean to stereotype, but clearly, it would be hard not to stereotype the kind of young man who belongs to Bristol CU so one might as well stereotype everyone else to balance things up!)
My experience of university CUs, even the ones with strong male headship theologies, is that they are, well, a good place to find company of the opposite sex for the blokes who are there, let's put it that way.
-------------------- Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mrs whibley
Shipmate
# 4798
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by SvitlanaV2: quote: Originally posted by quetzalcoatl: That seems to presuppose that young males are attracted by machismo. Is that correct? I have no idea.
My post was a response to the claim that young women have to attend these headship meetings or else they won't find Christian men to marry. The implication was that young male Christians go to 'macho' headship churches, but won't attend the reasonable churches led by friendly lady vicars.... A tongue in cheek comment, but was it meant to highlight a hidden reality?
My prevous post was a poor attempt at a joke. However, like all jokes it contained a grain of truth. When I was at Bristol, if you were an Evangelical Christian it was expected that you belonged to the CU, and often met the majority of your friends there. Church was the primary place of worship, but often secondary for christian fellowship (i.e. friendship). Teaching came from both church and CU. Of eight women in the flats I shared in the final year of university, two were not Bristol University students and four of the remaining 6 married men who they met at CU. Three of these are now divorced.
-------------------- I long for a faith that is gloriously treacherous - Mike Yaconelli
Posts: 942 | From: North Lincolnshire | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider: My experience of university CUs, even the ones with strong male headship theologies, is that they are, well, a good place to find company of the opposite sex for the blokes who are there, let's put it that way.
I see what you're getting at. But surely things don't work this way now. In the past, young men might have gone to church and youth groups to look for women, but now, it's far easier to find 'nice' girls outside the church; and at uni, girls are everywhere these days. For a not very religious male, the weirdness of a CU church service surely counteracts the appeal of the women there - especially when you can meet plenty of good looking girls in the bar!
However, we're probably not going to agree on this one!
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Leprechaun: quote: Originally posted by leo:
According to this, they quote: had introduced the rule as a compromise after a previous policy banned women speakers altogether.
This is almost certainly wrong. My understanding was that they had no policy at all [/QUOTE] So why do they say "a previous policy banned women speakers altogether."?
I am on the ministry team of the university church- we used to have little contact with the CU except for picking up some of the damage when disillusioned members came to us.
Now, the CU uses chaplaincy premises and is very much part of chaplaincy life.
I'll check it out with the chaplain when i see him soon.
-------------------- My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/ My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by leo: So why do they say "a previous policy banned women speakers altogether."?
Strange isn't it? It's almost as if you can't believe everything you read in the papers.
-------------------- He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Carys
Ship's Celticist
# 78
|
Posted
I suspect the previous policy was unwritten. The limited speaking was an attempt at a compromise but an exec member still resigned. They have since said all women.
CUs are probably important in understanding the growth of headship. Students (from a range of Christian backgrounds) go up to university and if they are interested in pursuing their faith, they are likely to come across the CU and attend. Now, women speaking is seen as a secondary issue (i.e. one on which true Christians can disagree) so often it doesn't happen so as not to upset anyone (because no-one can object that it happens to be a man every week).* Conservative churches are often welll represented at CUs and so headship is kind of assumed. It's Bibilical isn't it? In my case, I really struggled at uni with wanting to be serious about my faith and being presented as evangelicalism being the only proper way to be serious. The ship was a lifeline back then, but not everyone has that. Headship churches, like CUs, are often far more intentional about evangelism and that's what is attractive, more than the theology. It's hard to fight headship when it is just basically assumed and attacking it is unbiblical.
*summary of a statement from a CICCU president
Carys
-------------------- O Lord, you have searched me and know me You know when I sit and when I rise
Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
A slight tangent, but are there universities where the UCCF affiliated CU is the only visible Christian presence on campus? When I was at uni the chaplaincy team and associated CathSoc and Christian Fellowship were extremely active, and the eCU set alarm bells ringing for most MOTR, Catholic and liberal Christians.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
Is there an SCM at Bristol? (According to the web, there is). Didn't have one at college, only CU, which was not to my taste. (And my mum warned me about it, though I think after I told her I was not impressed.) All girls establishment, so sexism not an issue.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Carys:
CUs are probably important in understanding the growth of headship. Students (from a range of Christian backgrounds) go up to university and if they are interested in pursuing their faith, they are likely to come across the CU and attend. Now, women speaking is seen as a secondary issue (i.e. one on which true Christians can disagree) so often it doesn't happen so as not to upset anyone (because no-one can object that it happens to be a man every week).* Conservative churches are often welll represented at CUs and so headship is kind of assumed. It's Bibilical isn't it? In my case, I really struggled at uni with wanting to be serious about my faith and being presented as evangelicalism being the only proper way to be serious. The ship was a lifeline back then, but not everyone has that. Headship churches, like CUs, are often far more intentional about evangelism and that's what is attractive, more than the theology. It's hard to fight headship when it is just basically assumed and attacking it is unbiblical.
But not all 'conservative' churches, if by that you mean evangelical ones, are anti women preachers. The Baptists aren't. Many of the Pentecostals aren't now, either. So it must be a certain kind of conservatism that's in the ascendancy here.
Secondly, you imply that being serious about your faith at univeristy now means joining CU. So what's happened to the denominational student societies? Have they mostly died a death? When I was an undergrad in the early 90s, I was involved in MurcSoc, which was a joint Methodist and URC society. It was quite lively. I didn't bother with CU that much. When I pursued my studies later at a uni in another town, I had some dealings with the Methodist chaplain, but there only seemed to be one other Methodist student involved. No idea about CU. I've also studied at two other places without getting involved with the student Christian scene (I felt too old and too busy by then). At my most recent place, though, there are definitely denominational options for students, as well as CU.
Has a split developed whereby evangelicals now feel obliged to join CU, while the denominational societies have become resolutely liberal, meaning an evangelical Methodist or Anglican would feel less at home in MethSoc or AngSoc than in CU? If so, the more open evangelical churches should be a bit worried about this, because it means that some students are likely to be influenced by extreme doctrines that aren't shared by their own denominations.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet: A slight tangent, but are there universities where the UCCF affiliated CU is the only visible Christian presence on campus? When I was at uni the chaplaincy team and associated CathSoc and Christian Fellowship were extremely active, and the eCU set alarm bells ringing for most MOTR, Catholic and liberal Christians.
My university (Northampton)! The Anglican chaplain and a few of us students have just started our own group though. IME a lot of smaller, newer universities don't have enough students for a CathSoc, SCM etc and UCCF-affilated CUs are the only visible Christian presence on campus. When I was at Chichester that was the case, although the large number of Theology students attending gave the meetings a more intellectually curious slant.
UCCF are actually now really clamping down on CUs being used for fellowship/socialising and are saying that CU should be only for mission on campus - so at the CU at my uni, there's no freshers' meal, socials or any socialising after the meeting. It's not forbidden, but it's not encouraged (of course a group of us ignore it and go to the pub together afterwards).
We do have an active chaplaincy team on campus but it's explicitly a multi-faith chaplaincy and so is seen as religious rather than Christian (but our full-time chaplain is a CoE vicar and most of the chaplaincy team are Christians).
-------------------- 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
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by SvitlanaV2: quote: Originally posted by Carys:
CUs are probably important in understanding the growth of headship. Students (from a range of Christian backgrounds) go up to university and if they are interested in pursuing their faith, they are likely to come across the CU and attend. Now, women speaking is seen as a secondary issue (i.e. one on which true Christians can disagree) so often it doesn't happen so as not to upset anyone (because no-one can object that it happens to be a man every week).* Conservative churches are often welll represented at CUs and so headship is kind of assumed. It's Bibilical isn't it? In my case, I really struggled at uni with wanting to be serious about my faith and being presented as evangelicalism being the only proper way to be serious. The ship was a lifeline back then, but not everyone has that. Headship churches, like CUs, are often far more intentional about evangelism and that's what is attractive, more than the theology. It's hard to fight headship when it is just basically assumed and attacking it is unbiblical.
But not all 'conservative' churches, if by that you mean evangelical ones, are anti women preachers. The Baptists aren't. Many of the Pentecostals aren't now, either. So it must be a certain kind of conservatism that's in the ascendancy here.
Secondly, you imply that being serious about your faith at univeristy now means joining CU. So what's happened to the denominational student societies? Have they mostly died a death? When I was an undergrad in the early 90s, I was involved in MurcSoc, which was a joint Methodist and URC society. It was quite lively. I didn't bother with CU that much. When I pursued my studies later at a uni in another town, I had some dealings with the Methodist chaplain, but there only seemed to be one other Methodist student involved. No idea about CU. I've also studied at two other places without getting involved with the student Christian scene (I felt too old and too busy by then). At my most recent place, though, there are definitely denominational options for students, as well as CU.
Has a split developed whereby evangelicals now feel obliged to join CU, while the denominational societies have become resolutely liberal, meaning an evangelical Methodist or Anglican would feel less at home in MethSoc or AngSoc than in CU? If so, the more open evangelical churches should be a bit worried about this, because it means that some students are likely to be influenced by extreme doctrines that aren't shared by their own denominations.
IME only the biggest universities have student bodies that can support denominational Christian societies - otherwise, the CU is by far the most visible presence on campus for most UK universities. Denominational churches in general don't seem to be very attractive for students - at my own CU, nobody attends a Baptist church. With the exception of a small band of rebel Anglicans, people either attend the local Vineyard church (but mostly because they meet on campus) or this place. Reynard Way is the 'in' church. I think there is a view that non-denominational churches are somehow more Biblical.
-------------------- 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
|
|
Mr. Rob
Shipmate
# 5823
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Panda: ... Leaving aside the honkingly-large non sequitur of the church really not being the same as a family ...
Well it's not wise to leave aside the notion of the church as a family because it is just that, but a very dysfunctional family. Very.
*
Posts: 862 | From: USA | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
My uni wasn't large, but it was in the North West which might explain the viability of CathSoc. We had paid Anglican, Methodist and Roman Catholic chaplains, and there were Jews, Muslims, Brethren, Orthodox, Buddhists and others involved in the chaplaincy committees. It may have just been my perspective but the eCU only came up when (like Bristol) they were breaking the union's policies on gender discrimination, or they were holding events on campus telling all non-believers that they were nihilists, or they were politely informing the Pagans at the next table at Freshers' Fair that they were going to hell.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: IME only the biggest universities have student bodies that can support denominational Christian societies - otherwise, the CU is by far the most visible presence on campus for most UK universities. Denominational churches in general don't seem to be very attractive for students - at my own CU, nobody attends a Baptist church. With the exception of a small band of rebel Anglicans, people either attend the local Vineyard church (but mostly because they meet on campus) or this place. Reynard Way is the 'in' church. I think there is a view that non-denominational churches are somehow more Biblical.
Or maybe the non-denominational churches have simply become more adept at dealing with students. Being fairly new, they have fewer traditions to hold them back.
Is it now the case that most Christian freshers arrive from a non-denominational background, or do Baptist, Anglican and Methodist students routinely desert their denominations for CU-affiliated churches when they go to university? Why should students raised as sober Methodists or Anglicans suddenly worry about whether these denominations are sufficiently 'Biblical'?
The future will be interesting.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
Some CU do some fairly cult-like recruitment techniques - being super friendly to freshers then switching to manipulative and trying to control what members are involved in - I know from a friend who was involved that they explicitly warned members away from the chaplaincy team. They also put on a front of being, as you say, non-denominational and, for those who aren't well versed in these things, that sound a lot like ecumenical. When I was at FE college I got involved with the CU there and it was a while before I realised the person leading it was a bit on the extreme side. Though being inattentive as I am I did spend a happy half hour arguing that a literal reading of the last supper supports a traditional view of the real presence in the eucharist. Really I should have known what was going on when the words "portable baptistry" came up in conversation.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
When I was an undergrad, a student's home church would sometimes make contact with the appropriate denominational society or chaplain as a way of ensuring a smooth transition for the student. Perhaps this no longer happens.
Maybe the historical churches are now mostly just resigned to the fact that they're likely to lose students either to the non-denominational churches or to nominalism or non-belief. They might judge that the former is better than the latter, so it's best not to make too much fuss. Maybe the future for chaplains is in working with students that aren't Christians at all, leaving the Christians to be catered for by the CU.
Getting back to the topic, it looks as though the 'headship argument' is only likely to become more prevalent if the mainstream churches are unwilling or unable to compete with the CUs in catering for the needs of Christian students.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable:
UCCF are actually now really clamping down on CUs being used for fellowship/socialising and are saying that CU should be only for mission on campus - so at the CU at my uni, there's no freshers' meal, socials or any socialising after the meeting. It's not forbidden, but it's not encouraged (of course a group of us ignore it and go to the pub together afterwards).
Some would say that sharing meals is a central part of 'mission', though!
quote: We do have an active chaplaincy team on campus but it's explicitly a multi-faith chaplaincy and so is seen as religious rather than Christian (but our full-time chaplain is a CoE vicar and most of the chaplaincy team are Christians).
I assumed that a 'multi-faith chaplaincy' meant that if you wanted to find a rabbi, an imam or a Catholic priest to speak to, you could easily find one. Does it really mean that a CofE vicar, a Baptist and a Quaker have to be able to respond to the spiritual needs that students of every faith might have? If I were a Muslim student I wouldn't necessarily be very keen on that. If most of the chaplaincy team are Christians, then it's 'multi-faith' in name only, it seems to me.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by SvitlanaV2: quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable:
UCCF are actually now really clamping down on CUs being used for fellowship/socialising and are saying that CU should be only for mission on campus - so at the CU at my uni, there's no freshers' meal, socials or any socialising after the meeting. It's not forbidden, but it's not encouraged (of course a group of us ignore it and go to the pub together afterwards).
Some would say that sharing meals is a central part of 'mission', though!
quote: We do have an active chaplaincy team on campus but it's explicitly a multi-faith chaplaincy and so is seen as religious rather than Christian (but our full-time chaplain is a CoE vicar and most of the chaplaincy team are Christians).
I assumed that a 'multi-faith chaplaincy' meant that if you wanted to find a rabbi, an imam or a Catholic priest to speak to, you could easily find one. Does it really mean that a CofE vicar, a Baptist and a Quaker have to be able to respond to the spiritual needs that students of every faith might have? If I were a Muslim student I wouldn't necessarily be very keen on that. If most of the chaplaincy team are Christians, then it's 'multi-faith' in name only, it seems to me.
Sorry for any confusion but the Baptist/Quaker/CoE chaplains are just the ones I named off the top of my head, we do have a Catholic priest (I would class that as Christian though?), a Muslim chaplain (I think imam is a specific title so not sure what his title is), a Ba'hai chaplain and even a Chinese pastor. We don't have a rabbi because the UK Jewish student population is tiny and since we get mostly students local to the area, they don't come here, but there are links to the nearest synagogues. We have a very active Islamic Society, actually.
Regarding meals being seen as mission, I would agree but UCCF doesn't. They have a very narrow definition of 'mission' which boils down to distributing copies of the Gospels and doing giving out cakes if students text their questions about God. There's no effort at what I would call natural evangelism or even any discipleship.
-------------------- 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
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet: Some CU do some fairly cult-like recruitment techniques - being super friendly to freshers then switching to manipulative and trying to control what members are involved in - I know from a friend who was involved that they explicitly warned members away from the chaplaincy team. They also put on a front of being, as you say, non-denominational and, for those who aren't well versed in these things, that sound a lot like ecumenical. When I was at FE college I got involved with the CU there and it was a while before I realised the person leading it was a bit on the extreme side. Though being inattentive as I am I did spend a happy half hour arguing that a literal reading of the last supper supports a traditional view of the real presence in the eucharist. Really I should have known what was going on when the words "portable baptistry" came up in conversation.
Sounds about right, especially confusing non-denominational with ecumenical. The CU at my uni has a very narrow list of approved churches too, which concerningly includes the Jesus Army which has definite cult-like tendencies. CUs in general are pretty controlling of members' behaviour. Going to the pub after meetings is a big deal for us because the girlfriend of the leader disapproved of Christians drinking alcohol.
-------------------- 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
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Penny S: Is there an SCM at Bristol? (According to the web, there is).
No - it died out a long time back, along with Anq/Methsoc and the like.
It has been reborn several times under different names. I did a session with them last year about atonement theories and there were only ten students - compared with the hundreds that belong to the CU.
The decline in Christian groups on campus is less to do with the evangelical ascendancy (in any case, CUs have always been bigger - larger than the Federation of Conservative students - the 2nd largest student society, even back in my day at Leeds in the 1970s) and more owing to the fact that most students coming up to uni these days have absolutely no religious affiliation whatsoever - despite our being Russell Group and, therefore, with a lot of ex-public school people maybe chapel inoculates).
-------------------- My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/ My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Regarding meals being seen as mission, I would agree but UCCF doesn't.
You might be interested in this article from the UCCF website of theological resources. Meals as mission
Have you ever actually been to a UCCF run event? None of what you are saying sounds familiar to me.
-------------------- He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Leprechaun: quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Regarding meals being seen as mission, I would agree but UCCF doesn't.
You might be interested in this article from the UCCF website of theological resources. Meals as mission
Have you ever actually been to a UCCF run event? None of what you are saying sounds familiar to me.
Um, yes? I go every week. And if what I'm saying isn't true then how come it's backed up by others in this thread? I'm only talking about my own experiences. My CU has a UCCF worker in it, and there are no socials beyond a weekend away once a year - not just no meals, but no socialising at all.
-------------------- 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
|
|
Carys
Ship's Celticist
# 78
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by SvitlanaV2: quote: Originally posted by Carys:
CUs are probably important in understanding the growth of headship. Students (from a range of Christian backgrounds) go up to university and if they are interested in pursuing their faith, they are likely to come across the CU and attend. Now, women speaking is seen as a secondary issue (i.e. one on which true Christians can disagree) so often it doesn't happen so as not to upset anyone (because no-one can object that it happens to be a man every week).* Conservative churches are often welll represented at CUs and so headship is kind of assumed. It's Bibilical isn't it? In my case, I really struggled at uni with wanting to be serious about my faith and being presented as evangelicalism being the only proper way to be serious. The ship was a lifeline back then, but not everyone has that. Headship churches, like CUs, are often far more intentional about evangelism and that's what is attractive, more than the theology. It's hard to fight headship when it is just basically assumed and attacking it is unbiblical.
But not all 'conservative' churches, if by that you mean evangelical ones, are anti women preachers. The Baptists aren't. Many of the Pentecostals aren't now, either. So it must be a certain kind of conservatism that's in the ascendancy here.
I was using 'conservative' to mean 'opposed to women preachers' there, or at least conservative evanglical which tends to be anti-women preachers.
quote:
Secondly, you imply that being serious about your faith at univeristy now means joining CU. So what's happened to the denominational student societies? Have they mostly died a death? When I was an undergrad in the early 90s, I was involved in MurcSoc, which was a joint Methodist and URC society. It was quite lively. I didn't bother with CU that much. When I pursued my studies later at a uni in another town, I had some dealings with the Methodist chaplain, but there only seemed to be one other Methodist student involved. No idea about CU. I've also studied at two other places without getting involved with the student Christian scene (I felt too old and too busy by then). At my most recent place, though, there are definitely denominational options for students, as well as CU.
Has a split developed whereby evangelicals now feel obliged to join CU, while the denominational societies have become resolutely liberal, meaning an evangelical Methodist or Anglican would feel less at home in MethSoc or AngSoc than in CU? If so, the more open evangelical churches should be a bit worried about this, because it means that some students are likely to be influenced by extreme doctrines that aren't shared by their own denominations.
I was an undergraduate at Aberystwyth in the late 90s whilst my mother was there in the late 60s. The religious scene had become decidedly evangelical in the mean time. In her day Holy Trinity was the main student church and was MOTR to high, while St Michael's (a separate parish) was very high. By the time I went, they (and Santes Fair and St Anne's Penparcau) were in a rectorial benefice with a charismatic evangelical rector and a indeed vicar at Trinitiy, although Trinity retained more liturgical trappings. I was unusal as a student in choosing Trinity and even there the underlying assumption seem to be that they did liturgy to keep the churchgoers happy and there was a move towards more modern hymns, at least amongst the people involved in the homegroups, although one of the wardens was still quite high. The Church Student Society (AngSoc) of which my mum had been secretary had vanished. CU was large (c. 100) and Welsh CU smaller (c15). In my final year, I did get involved with both MethSoc and CathSoc, but MethSoc that year at least had an evangelical slant, not strongly but slightly. So yes, evangelical was pretty much the only way to be serious about one's faith. I did go over to Llanbadarn occassionally (after Istarted bellringing) and that was pretty establishment with not much in the way of homegroups. So yes, engaging with faith was pretty much evangelical, unless you found the small CathSoc and whilst Fr John was wonderful, I'm not an RC.
So yes, there is somewhere where there is very little other option, even in terms of churches -- although some of the Welsh non-confromist chapels were pretty liberal, but in my first year my Welsh wasn't good enough and after that they wouldn't have been sacramental enough for me. At Trinity at least there was a weekly Eucharist.
As a post-grad in Cambridge there were a lot more options, but the CU was still pretty dominant and people often got caught up into it without really realising it was evangelical and so didn't look for other options (and sometimes were warned off them).
Carys
-------------------- O Lord, you have searched me and know me You know when I sit and when I rise
Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Louise
Shipmate
# 30
|
Posted
Moved from closed thread in Purgatory quote: Percy B Shipmate # 17238 Posted 08 December, 2012 22:01 The Church Times reports that the Christian Union of a significant British University requires husbands of women who are to speak or teach at their meetings to be present when the wife speaks.
How interesting
I take it they quote scriptural authority for this.
At first I felt sure this is unusual in Christian churches / congregations I then began to wonder. I don't move in evangelical circles so I simply don't know.
What about single women? Does a responsible man need to be present for them?
I have to say I do find it extraordinary that students in a modern university hold this view.
Any thoughts? I would be interested to read a reasoned argument in favour of this position which was not simply scripture says no.
quote: Kelly Alves # 2522 Posted 08 December, 2012 22:51 Every time I hear stuff like this I think, "Iran, 1979" How much are we going to allow?
quote: cliffdweller Shipmate # 13338 Posted 08 December, 2012 23:20 I'm certainly not going to support it, but will affirm that it happens in some places. My husband and I actually team-taught a course at a Bible college in East Africa-- the dean asked (somewhat sheepishly) if hubby would mind being in the room when I taught. The college officially supported women in ministry-- about 1/3 of our students were female. But he felt that female pastors were unusual enough in their neck of the woods so as to raise some questions, and wanted the students to know that what I was teaching was kosher.
In that context, I went with it-- we were there to serve, after all, and cross cultural ministry always requires compromise. But closer to home I wouldn't stand for it.
-------------------- Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.
Posts: 6918 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Noodlehead
Shipmate
# 9600
|
Posted
I was a member of the University CU in question.
The policy certainly was no female speakers for many years. Indeed, until 2010, there was a policy of no female presidents, but the Student's Union intervened and said that they couldn't enforce such a discriminatory policy and remain part of the Union. So the constitution got changed and the status quo remains.
I'm not going to hold my breath for female speakers even though they've backed down on the issue. Until there is one actually standing up at a CU meeting, I will not believe that the CU won't just carry on with their unofficial policy.
Personally, the thing that annoys me most about the whole thing, is that it has been said over and over again that they won't force female speakers on the uber-conservative crowd for the sake of 'unity'. Why is everyone else being forced to swallow discrimination for the sake of unity? Why is it easier to ask that of people, than it is to ask the conservatives to suck it up? [ 09. December 2012, 10:55: Message edited by: Noodlehead ]
-------------------- If you can doubt at points where other people find no impulse to doubt, you are making progress. - Zhuangzi
Posts: 278 | From: Sunny south | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
The idea is that the fundamentalists are 'weaker brethren' whose faith must not be endangered, and that women teaching and preaching is 'meat sacrificed to idols.'
-------------------- At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by leo: quote: Originally posted by Leprechaun: quote: Originally posted by leo:
According to this, they quote: had introduced the rule as a compromise after a previous policy banned women speakers altogether.
This is almost certainly wrong. My understanding was that they had no policy at all
So why do they say "a previous policy banned women speakers altogether."?
I am on the ministry team of the university church- we used to have little contact with the CU except for picking up some of the damage when disillusioned members came to us.
Now, the CU uses chaplaincy premises and is very much part of chaplaincy life.
I'll check it out with the chaplain when i see him soon. [/QUOTE] Talks with him this morning after the Eucharist.
Yes, I was wrong. There was no previous, written policy, just custom and practice.
It would also appear that the CU made their decision to appease a tiny minority - perhaps only four members - out of a 'not causing weaker brethren to stumble' type of argument.
-------------------- My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/ My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
anne
Shipmate
# 73
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Amos: The idea is that the fundamentalists are 'weaker brethren' whose faith must not be endangered, and that women teaching and preaching is 'meat sacrificed to idols.'
And extra points for the unexpected appearance of that old favourite, the 'women as meat' metaphor.
Haven't we come a long way.
anne
-------------------- ‘I would have given the Church my head, my hand, my heart. She would not have them. She did not know what to do with them. She told me to go back and do crochet' Florence Nightingale
Posts: 338 | From: Devon | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by anne: quote: Originally posted by Amos: The idea is that the fundamentalists are 'weaker brethren' whose faith must not be endangered, and that women teaching and preaching is 'meat sacrificed to idols.'
And extra points for the unexpected appearance of that old favourite, the 'women as meat' metaphor.
Haven't we come a long way.
anne
I think this is more common that realised - it's just that Bristol's been busted whilst others haven't.
In one of her books, Michelle Guiness describes an incident where her son suggested that her as a speaker after the one who'd been arranged cancelled at the last minute. The leadership refused the offer and cancelled the meeting instead. Women weren't allowed to lead meetings.
Ironic that the first time some young people discover Christian sexism is at Univ. And that people still think that it's better that the gospel isn't preached at all if the only person available is a woman.
Tubbs [ 09. December 2012, 13:30: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
-------------------- "It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Noodlehead
Shipmate
# 9600
|
Posted
BUCU statement
My favourite part is that 'the fundamental equality of women and men' is a 'core biblical truth' now the matter has had national press traction.
The thing is, if the conservative types were to replace the word 'woman' with 'black person', they'd be horrified at how offensive their arguments sound...
-------------------- If you can doubt at points where other people find no impulse to doubt, you are making progress. - Zhuangzi
Posts: 278 | From: Sunny south | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Tubbs: quote: Originally posted by anne: quote: Originally posted by Amos: The idea is that the fundamentalists are 'weaker brethren' whose faith must not be endangered, and that women teaching and preaching is 'meat sacrificed to idols.'
And extra points for the unexpected appearance of that old favourite, the 'women as meat' metaphor.
Haven't we come a long way.
anne
I think this is more common that realised - it's just that Bristol's been busted whilst others haven't.
In one of her books, Michelle Guiness describes an incident where her son suggested that her as a speaker after the one who'd been arranged cancelled at the last minute. The leadership refused the offer and cancelled the meeting instead. Women weren't allowed to lead meetings.
Ironic that the first time some young people discover Christian sexism is at Univ. And that people still think that it's better that the gospel isn't preached at all if the only person available is a woman.
Tubbs
I also remember Michelle Guiness talking about being challenged about the way she dressed by the Christian Union.
-------------------- 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
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
The recent comments on the thread reflect what a theologian said to me recently about the people coming foward to train for the ministry: as churches have declined, those young adults who remain are more and more likely to be quite strongly evangelical.
I suppose some may find it worth trying to battle with the CU leadership, but is there any point? The CU isn't like the CofE - it doesn't have to try (or pretend to try) to cater for different religious perspectives. Yes it's a parachurch organisation - but it's parachurch at the more evangelical end. So long as an increasing majority of Christian students come from firmly evangelical backgrounds, the complaints of a more liberal Christian minority are going to fall on deaf ears. You have to set up your own, more select (i.e. smaller) group for Christian students who can't identify with CU teachings.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Qoheleth.
Semi-Sagacious One
# 9265
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Noodlehead: ... until 2010, there was a policy of no female presidents
In 1977, I (male) was the first "Lady Vice-President" of London MethSoc, the President that year being female. Only the job-titles were in our constitution, no chromosomal requirements.
That was thirty five years ago.
-------------------- The Benedictine Community at Alton Abbey offers a friendly, personal service for the exclusive supply of Rosa Mystica incense.
Posts: 2532 | From: the radiator of life | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: quote: Originally posted by Leprechaun: quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Regarding meals being seen as mission, I would agree but UCCF doesn't.
You might be interested in this article from the UCCF website of theological resources. Meals as mission
Have you ever actually been to a UCCF run event? None of what you are saying sounds familiar to me.
Um, yes? I go every week. And if what I'm saying isn't true then how come it's backed up by others in this thread? I'm only talking about my own experiences. My CU has a UCCF worker in it, and there are no socials beyond a weekend away once a year - not just no meals, but no socialising at all.
1) UCCF don't run CUs.
2) They have published an article at total odds to what your CU are doing. You don't think perchance, your CU is just an oddity? Despite all the mud being flung at CUs on this thread no one else has suggested they are anti socialising
The fact is, CUs, unlike any other of societies mentioned here (bar Cathsocs, which for some reason seem to get a free pass) have largely managed to hold together people from complementarian and egalitarian churches. That means someone has to compromise. In the vast majority of CUs, and at most UCCF events, that's the complementarian, in some CUs most people who attend go to complementarian churches and it all swings the other way. It's usually short term bar a few exceptional cases because of other sociological factors.
Quite frankly, if there's that much demand for a Christian society that's less inclusive and wants to regard complentarians as unreconstructed sexists that's fine. University's all about disagreeing with people. Go and set one up. The chaplains will, undoubtedly, be delighted.
And as for Bristol, they have definitely had a woman speak before, but CUs turn over so fast there's probably no one still about who remembers.
-------------------- He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: quote: Originally posted by Tubbs: quote: Originally posted by anne: quote: Originally posted by Amos: The idea is that the fundamentalists are 'weaker brethren' whose faith must not be endangered, and that women teaching and preaching is 'meat sacrificed to idols.'
And extra points for the unexpected appearance of that old favourite, the 'women as meat' metaphor.
Haven't we come a long way.
anne
I think this is more common that realised - it's just that Bristol's been busted whilst others haven't.
In one of her books, Michelle Guiness describes an incident where her son suggested that her as a speaker after the one who'd been arranged cancelled at the last minute. The leadership refused the offer and cancelled the meeting instead. Women weren't allowed to lead meetings.
Ironic that the first time some young people discover Christian sexism is at Univ. And that people still think that it's better that the gospel isn't preached at all if the only person available is a woman.
Tubbs
I also remember Michelle Guiness talking about being challenged about the way she dressed by the Christian Union.
You read that book too! Her reply was suitably robust IIRC.
Leprechaun, my best mate was at Bristol many moons ago and she remembers it as being extremely Conservative - and yes, with the big C - evangelical. And as the leadership tend to be self recommending, there will be less change than you think. They may have had the occasional woman speaker over the years, but it was the exception rather than the rule. She also remembers them as being very exclusive - any Christian who attended the wrong sort of church or one of the other Christian societies wasn't considered to be really a Christian. I've heard similar stories from other UCCF affiliated CUs elsewhere as well.
Tubbs [ 09. December 2012, 16:08: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
-------------------- "It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
Did Leprechaun really just try to claim that a bar on women teaching made a society MORE inclusive?
The claim that CUs hold together disparate Christian groups is pretty ridiculous - they are evangelical only, for starters, and pretty conservative at that. It's like the CPGB claiming to be broad front because it has Marxist AND Leninist members. [ 09. December 2012, 17:08: Message edited by: Arethosemyfeet ]
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Noodlehead
Shipmate
# 9600
|
Posted
I was at Bristol CU not very many moons ago (last few years) and I still have friends 'on the inside'. It is uber-conservative, and the way the executive are elected each year (the outgoing executive nominates the incoming executive - any vote is relatively redundant as there is only ever one approved candidate for each post) means that things never change.
It is also clearly run by UCCF. UCCF provide the training, the written materials, a staff worker, a relay worker and the doctrinal basis that everyone who wants to be involved or to speak at a meeting must sign. It's here. The mere fact that the doctrinal basis exists proves that the CU isn't interested in being inclusive and that UCCF isn't interested in promoting inclusivity - I'm pretty sure that there are many Christians, indeed whole denominations, who couldn't sign that statement.
A little BUCU anecdote to illustrate:
In the year after I left the CU, a friend who was on the exec tried to organise a joint event with the Methodist Society and the Catholic Society. Objections were raised because the CU didn't want 'unity for the sake of unity'. The event never happened. [ 09. December 2012, 18:02: Message edited by: Noodlehead ]
-------------------- If you can doubt at points where other people find no impulse to doubt, you are making progress. - Zhuangzi
Posts: 278 | From: Sunny south | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ElaineC
Shipmate
# 12244
|
Posted
I was in the CU at Kingston Polytechnic (now a University) in the early 70's.
My future husband was also part of the group.
Just after we got engaged, the group was thinking about having elders and my name had come up. It was then pointed out that as I was engaged I couldn't be an elder when my fiance wasn't. He was much younger in the faith than I was and wouldn't have been considered.
At the time I never gave it a thought. Not actually from the religious context but from the fact that I was painfully shy and didn't like speaking in meetings anyway.
As life has gone on we have had different ministries with the church. He was organist and choirmaster while I was churchwarden. Now he sings in the choir and I was recently licensed as a Reader. So I'm an elder after all.
-------------------- Music is the only language in which you cannot say a mean or sarcastic thing. John Erskine
Posts: 464 | From: Orpington, Kent, UK | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aravis
Shipmate
# 13824
|
Posted
I was in the college CU at Girton, Cambridge in the mid 1980s. We always had two CU leaders, one male and one female, and both male and female Bible study leaders. Come to think of it, that may not have been general policy in the university. I don't recall any female speakers at CICCU events (went to these in my first year but not after that). I remember the college CU leaders getting their knuckles rapped in my final year because only a tiny proportion of our CU (under 10% I think) had signed the doctrinal statement and wouldn't be seen dead at the central CICCU meetings. We were rather more open to other religious groups than some of the CUs; at least half those who went to some CU meetings also went to chaplaincy events, and two students from the Catholic Society came regularly to CU Bible studies. Probably as a result of this our membership was high. I had to produce a summer prayer diary at the end of my second year and realised that 1 in 6 students at the college had a reasonable amount of involvement with the CU!
Posts: 689 | From: S Wales | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Noodlehead: I was at Bristol CU not very many moons ago (last few years) and I still have friends 'on the inside'. It is uber-conservative, and the way the executive are elected each year (the outgoing executive nominates the incoming executive - any vote is relatively redundant as there is only ever one approved candidate for each post) means that things never change.
It is also clearly run by UCCF. UCCF provide the training, the written materials, a staff worker, a relay worker and the doctrinal basis that everyone who wants to be involved or to speak at a meeting must sign. It's here. The mere fact that the doctrinal basis exists proves that the CU isn't interested in being inclusive and that UCCF isn't interested in promoting inclusivity - I'm pretty sure that there are many Christians, indeed whole denominations, who couldn't sign that statement.
A little BUCU anecdote to illustrate:
In the year after I left the CU, a friend who was on the exec tried to organise a joint event with the Methodist Society and the Catholic Society. Objections were raised because the CU didn't want 'unity for the sake of unity'. The event never happened.
I realised after I posted that many moons ago roughly translates to over 20 years ... They also remember that although there were Hall Fellowship leaders, the CU leadership kept a close eye on them. In theory, all the Hall Fell leaders should be considered for nomination to the Exec. In practice, only the "sound" ones ever got nominated. And they would also attempt to replace / undermine those they didn't think were suitable - even if the members of the Hall liked them
UCCF used to be part of Spring Harvest's Word Alive Weeks. IIRC, one of the reasons they stopped / had their own separate weeks was because they didn't like women on the platform.
Tubbs
-------------------- "It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Not
Ship's Quack
# 2166
|
Posted
Another Bristol CU survivor - probably overlapping with Mrs Whibley and Tubbs' friend (do pm me!) - this all sounds depressingly familiar. It was all the things described when I was there: very conservative, with a particular paranoia about charismaticism. The list of approved churches actually had physical existence as a 'church guide' which made it very clear which were 'sound'. The exec were appointed by the previous exec and the hall and faculty fellowship group leaders by the exec as well so control was very tight. I started to get disillusioned after a Catholic hall fellowship leader (a controversial innovation who'd slipped through the net on the dodgy grounds of her transparently deep, mature and loving faith) was interrogated by the CU exec at length over whether she could really sign up to every jot and tittle of the doctrinal basis. She resigned in disgust.
I also went to the church where the student work was led by, among others, Susie Leafe (of the OP). It took several years after leaving there and CU to recover from the sheer screwed up mess my theology and faith were left in.
Ironically, for all the talk about evangelism, what actually happened is that CU members spent their life in meetings (main CU meeting, hall or flat fellowship meeting, prayer meetings, leaders meetings...) and only occasionally emerged from the ghetto to do some startlingly inept evangelism.
And yes, sorry gone off topic, male President, female Vice President, no female speakers at main meetings and endless quibbling about what constituted women 'teaching' (bad) and what was legitimate (praying and bible studies, providing no original thought was involved).
Oh dear. Flashbacks.
-------------------- Was CJ; now Not
Posts: 600 | From: the far, far West | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Elaine: quote: As life has gone on we have had different ministries with the church. He was organist and choirmaster while I was churchwarden. Now he sings in the choir and I was recently licensed as a Reader. So I'm an elder after all.
Well, there you go - the Holy Spirit was trying to tell your CU Exec something and they didn't listen...
I was a member of the CU at my university for a year. The following year I actually read the Doctrinal Statement properly and decided that I couldn't in conscience accept the doctrinal rulings of a bunch of students with no theological training whatsoever... and joined the Methodist-Anglican Society instead.
Our CU was NOT affiliated with the Student's Union, precisely because they refused to have women speakers at their meetings. All the other Christian societies on campus were affiliated with the SU and only required you to pay membership fees before joining.
This was quite a long time ago, when dinosaurs still roamed the earth and there were other Christian societies to join, even at a fairly small university. It's depressing to see the same arguments being rehashed again.
And what are Bristol SU thinking? Are they worried about a lawsuit if they de-affiliate the CU?
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Tubbs: UCCF used to be part of Spring Harvest's Word Alive Weeks. IIRC, one of the reasons they stopped / had their own separate weeks was because they didn't like women on the platform.
Tubbs
You do not RC. It was a penal subsititution disagreement, and the UCCF/Keswick event that replaced Word Alive has women speakers.
-------------------- He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Leprechaun: quote: Originally posted by Tubbs: UCCF used to be part of Spring Harvest's Word Alive Weeks. IIRC, one of the reasons they stopped / had their own separate weeks was because they didn't like women on the platform.
Tubbs
You do not RC. It was a penal subsititution disagreement, and the UCCF/Keswick event that replaced Word Alive has women speakers.
Ah yes, the refusal to declare Steve Chalke a hertick. Apologies for the faulty memory.
Define "has women speakers".
Tubbs [ 10. December 2012, 12:10: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
-------------------- "It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Not: Another Bristol CU survivor - probably overlapping with Mrs Whibley and Tubbs' friend (do pm me!) - this all sounds depressingly familiar. It was all the things described when I was there: very conservative, with a particular paranoia about charismaticism. The list of approved churches actually had physical existence as a 'church guide' which made it very clear which were 'sound'. The exec were appointed by the previous exec and the hall and faculty fellowship group leaders by the exec as well so control was very tight. I started to get disillusioned after a Catholic hall fellowship leader (a controversial innovation who'd slipped through the net on the dodgy grounds of her transparently deep, mature and loving faith) was interrogated by the CU exec at length over whether she could really sign up to every jot and tittle of the doctrinal basis. She resigned in disgust.
I also went to the church where the student work was led by, among others, Susie Leafe (of the OP). It took several years after leaving there and CU to recover from the sheer screwed up mess my theology and faith were left in.
Ironically, for all the talk about evangelism, what actually happened is that CU members spent their life in meetings (main CU meeting, hall or flat fellowship meeting, prayer meetings, leaders meetings...) and only occasionally emerged from the ghetto to do some startlingly inept evangelism.
And yes, sorry gone off topic, male President, female Vice President, no female speakers at main meetings and endless quibbling about what constituted women 'teaching' (bad) and what was legitimate (praying and bible studies, providing no original thought was involved).
Oh dear. Flashbacks.
You’re having flashbacks?! I never went, but many an evening was spent unravelling the damage to my best mate’s faith over a pint of wine or two.
We eventually came to the conclusion that many of the CU / Exec were well meaning, but totally inept with an extremely narrow view of God. (Ahem. There were usually a few more swear words by the time we got to this point).
Some of what happened can be put down to youthful excess – and a desire to cling onto certainties through a major life change. Unfortunately, UCCF policy and reps, the self perpetuating way the Exec were appointed and the completely circular argument that, “those who don’t think as we do aren’t really Christians” didn’t help any.
Their behaviour and attitudes did a lot of damage – and has led to some people I know actively discouraging people off to University from joining the CU until they’ve researched it a bit and finding a good, local church instead.
Tubbs
-------------------- "It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Birdseye
I can see my house from here!
# 5280
|
Posted
I never became a member of my university's CU as I went to one meeting and it seemed terrifyingly cult-like... door-people guarding the huge meetings, endless worship choruses until your mind melted, and perfectly nice students coming out with strange guilt complexes and split-personalities... I DID have a friend who joined... ... and then regularly used to come and hide at my digs on CU nights because they would send persistent friends to 'collect' her for the meeting.
-------------------- Life is what happens whilst you're busy making other plans. a birdseye view
Posts: 1615 | From: West Yorkshire | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
My sister went to a big meeting at her place (Roehampton) and found herself in a hall with a lot of enthusiastic hand wavers who she did not feel moved to emulate. She then found that the visiting speaker, and others were aiming their attention at her. And then realised that the ushers were blocking the doors out. She did not feel the presence of the Holy Spirit.
I'm not sure this was the CU, but there's something in common with what I hear from other accounts.
Including that crossposted with above! [ 10. December 2012, 13:20: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Leprechaun: You do not RC. It was a penal subsititution disagreement, and the UCCF/Keswick event that replaced Word Alive has women speakers.
Baroness Cox does not count as "women".
Week 1: she's the one woman out of 7 speakers Week 2: she's the one woman out of 8 speakers
Worship leaders are all men. The trustees are all men, the steering committee are all men (bar one?)
Half the world, and all that...
-------------------- Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Doc Tor: quote: Originally posted by Leprechaun: You do not RC. It was a penal subsititution disagreement, and the UCCF/Keswick event that replaced Word Alive has women speakers.
Baroness Cox does not count as "women".
Week 1: she's the one woman out of 7 speakers Week 2: she's the one woman out of 8 speakers
Worship leaders are all men. The trustees are all men, the steering committee are all men (bar one?)
Half the world, and all that...
It does if you count her twice as she has two speaking slots.
Having looked at the speaker and worship leaders compared to Spring Harvest's, then I'd say that Spring Harvest's was the more diverse and representative of the wider church.
And then there's Word Alive's statement of faith comparted to Spring Harvest's.
Tubbs [ 10. December 2012, 15:15: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
-------------------- "It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|