|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Why is the public discourse of the Church of England dominated by Dead Horses?
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Never heard of Vicky Beeching - looked her up - she isn't a preacher or church leader so why is she more influential than Chalke?
I am very surprised you've never heard of her. For a start she's much more well-known in evangelical circles - I know many evangelicals who have never heard of Steve Chalke but almost all will have heard of Vicky Beeching as most will be singing her worship songs.
I avoid 'evangelical circles' like the plague.
And the notion that a singer can be more influential than a moral theologian suggests how vapid evangelicalism has become.
If it is such evangelicals that LGBTs have to fear then they (LGBTs)have already won the war.
Er, she's not a singer, she's a songwriter and Oxford-educated theologian, currently working on a PhD in the ethics of technology from Durham. What a nasty and ignorant bit of sneering. As iamchristian says, the idea of hymns and worship songs influencing Christian culture is nothing new.
And if you avoid evangelical circles like the plague I don't see how you can make any kind of fair comment on evangelicalism.
--------------------
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
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
And the notion that a singer can be more influential than a moral theologian suggests how vapid evangelicalism has become.
If it is such evangelicals that LGBTs have to fear then they (LGBTs)have already won the war.
I grew up in the Methodist Church, where singing the faith is far more commonplace than the study of any 'moral theologians', so I find yours a very interesting comment.
The only evangelical theologians I've seriously engaged with are of the British, urban, post-colonial type, and they'd certainly like to have more influence in the pews than they currently do! I don't know if the more mainstream variety are happier in this respect.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Never heard of Vicky Beeching - looked her up - she isn't a preacher or church leader so why is she more influential than Chalke?
I am very surprised you've never heard of her. For a start she's much more well-known in evangelical circles - I know many evangelicals who have never heard of Steve Chalke but almost all will have heard of Vicky Beeching as most will be singing her worship songs.
I avoid 'evangelical circles' like the plague.
And the notion that a singer can be more influential than a moral theologian suggests how vapid evangelicalism has become.
If it is such evangelicals that LGBTs have to fear then they (LGBTs)have already won the war.
Er, she's not a singer, she's a songwriter and Oxford-educated theologian, currently working on a PhD in the ethics of technology from Durham. What a nasty and ignorant bit of sneering. As iamchristian says, the idea of hymns and worship songs influencing Christian culture is nothing new.
And if you avoid evangelical circles like the plague I don't see how you can make any kind of fair comment on evangelicalism.
I get around (ahem) in evangelical circles a bit but I'd never heard of Vicky until I read your post. I've read some of her stuff now: very interesting.
Yes - I'd place her current position with that of Steve Chalke. They might both call themselves "evangelical" but to most people in that constituency they've redefined what that word means to suit their own views.
Their views would not be acceptable to most evangelicals (of whatever denomination)in my experience of that group, whether at local, regional or national levels. Chalke's foray into biblical interpretation is fast making him an outsider in his own denomination.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
[QUOTE]
1. And the notion that a singer can be more influential than a moral theologian suggests how vapid evangelicalism has become.
2. If it is such evangelicals that LGBTs have to fear then they (LGBTs)have already won the war.
1. It doesn't need a singer nor a moral theologian to be influential. Anyone who is close to God will inevitably do it. The sung word is just as much an expression of one's encounter with God (and response to that) as is an academic tome from a moral theologian. More people are likely to understand the former anyway.
2. You use of the word "war" here rather gives your game away. It's not a war, it's a tragedy because no one will win save division. We will all get what we want but at what cost to the gospel imperative in the UK?
While we're navel gazing in this way the economic upheaval continues around us. The church isn't responding to this because we are spending all our energy on in house issues.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
2. You use of the word "war" here rather gives your game away. It's not a war, it's a tragedy because no one will win save division. We will all get what we want but at what cost to the gospel imperative in the UK?
If you think that this isn't a war then the first thing you can do is stop Evangelical Christians and other Christian homophobes shooting at gay people and their friends and families. Trying to destroy their marriages or prevent them from ever happening. Trying to harrass them and compare consensual loving sex to bestiality and paedophilia. And the very least you can do is stop objecting when those your fellow Christians would shoot return fire.
The damage to the Gospel? The Good News that "Hey everyone! God for no reason made you wrong and many of you have a choice either to be brainwashed by us in 'Ex-gay' movements or you can turn your back on love!" The Gospel being preached as an exhortation to despise your neighbor (if your neighbor is gay) does deep, profound, and far reaching damage to the gospel. Or if this is the actual gospel message means that as moral teaching it is best used as toilet paper.
Most decent people under 40 don't believe that what Christians preach about gay people should be used to judge gay people. The homophobes are clearly wrong. But when the Gospel you preach is one of rejection of love then whether you speak in the tongues of angels or men you are either resounding gongs or clanging symbols. And the homophobia being preached is a rejection of love. As was pointed out before, Christians preaching homophobia isn't taken as a reason to judge gay people. It's taken as a reason to discount what Christians say about any moral issue.
And the "moderates" are preaching unity. Unity meaning "Those who are throwing stones should continue to be allowed to do so".
It is true that, as you say "While we're navel gazing in this way the economic upheaval continues around us." And that should be more important than preventing people who love each other from getting married if the Gospel is any actual form of Good News. But very clearly to many Christians it isn't. What's more important (even if they oppose inequality) is preventing people who love each other getting married. And to another group of Christians what's more important than the economic upheaval is "Unity". The idea they should get along with the Christians who consider destroying families more important than economic upheaval, and the idea that the people whose families are being destroyed shouldn't object too loudly.
The problem isn't that you are wasting time with house issues. It's that you consider unity with people trying to destroy love to be more important than the love of those they are trying to destroy, and to be more important than the economic upheaval.
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
originally posted by Exclamation Mark
I get around (ahem) in evangelical circles a bit but I'd never heard of Vicky until I read your post. I've read some of her stuff now: very interesting.
Yes - I'd place her current position with that of Steve Chalke. They might both call themselves "evangelical" but to most people in that constituency they've redefined what that word means to suit their own views.
Their views would not be acceptable to most evangelicals (of whatever denomination)in my experience of that group, whether at local, regional or national levels. Chalke's foray into biblical interpretation is fast making him an outsider in his own denomination.
I think that one of the things that Vicky Beeching and Steve Chalke share (along with such folks as Rob Bell and Brian McLaren) is a keen awareness of groundswell opinion. After all, there's no point in broadcasting even a prophetic rallying call if the troops aren't of a mind to respond. And I think that their views are congruent with a large portion of the (particularly young) evangelical community. It's not that they are out of step with the majority of evangelicals so much, as that they are out of step with the majority of evangelical leaders.
--------------------
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
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Yes - I'd place her [Vicky Beeching's] current position with that of Steve Chalke. They might both call themselves "evangelical" but to most people in that constituency they've redefined what that word means to suit their own views.
I think they call themselves 'evangelical' because they claim to base their views on the Bible, despite the fact that (as they both know full well, I'm sure!) most others claiming the label 'evangelical' disagree with their stance.
The point being that Chalke and Beeching (AIUI; certainly the latter is) are both happy to defend their views based on what the Bible says, rather than admitting they are diverging from the Bible for some reason or other (like a 'classical' liberal theologian might).
--------------------
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
|
|
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
Lex cantandi, lex credendi...
Vicky Beeching is more than a singer, no? A prominent writer of worship songs or hymns being as influential as a preacher wouldn't have been considered unusual to the Wesleys, I'm sure.
Which is why elements of evangelicalism are dangerous and based upon emotion.
Irrational feelings like homophobia can be whipped up through music.
'Worship songs' that are all about 'me' whip up selfishness and smugness.
--------------------
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
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
originally posted by leo
Irrational feelings like homophobia can be whipped up through music.
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
I think I would want a citation to justify this assertion. I should think there are approximately zero christian songs (and I know probably well over a thousand such songs) that could be said to justify homophobia. Rap or heavy rock, maybe, have small numbers of such lyrics, but not worship music.
--------------------
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
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
Lex cantandi, lex credendi...
Vicky Beeching is more than a singer, no? A prominent writer of worship songs or hymns being as influential as a preacher wouldn't have been considered unusual to the Wesleys, I'm sure.
Which is why elements of evangelicalism are dangerous and based upon emotion.
Irrational feelings like homophobia can be whipped up through music.
'Worship songs' that are all about 'me' whip up selfishness and smugness.
Except that Beeching is for marriage equality and her songs are not 'all about 'me''
It would be nice if you could not be so rude about a songwriter and theologian (again, not just a singer) who is, er, on the same side re homophobia as you.
--------------------
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
EM - IME worship songs and US Christian culture are less widespread in Baptist circles. Apologies for forgetting about the more trad Nonconformist evangelicals. Beeching is hardly an obscure name to most younger evangelicals though!
I also think that actually Beeching at least is perfectly in keeping with evangelicalism and is still regarded as evangelical by most evo laity. Maybe not the leaders, but afaik her announcement of her position on marriage equality was a big shock to more conservative evangelicals - up til then she was very much 'one of them'. Whereas with Steve Chalke, he's been losing influence for several reasons over several years. The point I was trying to (unsuccessfully) make was that Chalke's influence had waned to the extent that his perceived lack of orthodoxy on Dead Horses wasn't seen as any kind of surprise and didn't have very much impact. Beeching's announcement was a big surprise and had a big impact.
--------------------
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
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
Vicky Beeching is a new name to me - I'd never heard of her until this thread. As a result, I Googled her, and got a link to an article in "Christianity Today" which talks about her support of SSM. Sadly, every time I try to go there my entire pc freezes. Am I under spiritual attack, do you think?
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Starlight
Shipmate
# 12651
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
It doesn't need a singer nor a moral theologian to be influential. Anyone who is close to God will inevitably do it. The sung word is just as much an expression of one's encounter with God (and response to that) as is an academic tome from a moral theologian. More people are likely to understand the former anyway.
I think that sums up well the massive failings of evangelicalism in general - under the guise of spirituality and zeal, stupidity and ignorance is placed above knowledge. Yup. That's the evangelicalism we've all come to know and love. What need for facts or truth when you've got gut feelings? And if those gut feelings tell you to hate gay people, well if must be God telling you that right? And if you can find a verse in the bible which vaguely looks like it justifies your gut feelings on first glance, well then you know you're right! (Not that you had any uncertainty before, of course, because that would be "doubt" and as an evangelical you know that doubt is bad. (James 1:6))
quote:
You use of the word "war" here rather gives your game away.
The phrase "culture war" is a term coined and used by evangelicals in the US to refer to their ongoing "fight" to foist their insane views onto everyone else through law. In my observation, evangelicals in the US tend to use an absurdly large amount of military metaphors, which they seem to feel is justified by occasional reference to verses like "fight the good fight" with "the sword of the spirit" and "put on the breastplate of righteousness". Funnily enough, the gay people being literally killed by evangelicals (ie driven to suicide) in the evangelical's "war" against them, occasionally express the desire to have some rights, at which point evangelicals tend to wail loudly about themselves (!) being persecuted and losing (religious) freedom. I find their hypocrisy quite funny.
quote:
While we're navel gazing in this way the economic upheaval continues around us. The church isn't responding to this because we are spending all our energy on in house issues.
You can't use "Look over there! The economy!" as an excuse for ignoring basic human rights violations. Nothing stops both being addressed at the same time. I also note that Christians have quite a large number of different economic views, so I am somewhat confused by how you think Christians as a whole would be able to meaningfully speak to any economic issues without causing even more division among them than on the issue of homosexuality.
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
quote:
originally posted by leo
Irrational feelings like homophobia can be whipped up through music.
I think I would want a citation to justify this assertion.
I recall seeing a documentary about homophobia in Jamaica which claimed that hundreds of worship songs there had been written with anti-gay lyrics. They gave subtitles for one that was being played in public by a pentecostal pastor. Can't remember which of the various documentaries about Jamaican homophobia it was though.
Posts: 745 | From: NZ | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Starlight:
You can't use "Look over there! The economy!" as an excuse for ignoring basic human rights violations.
If evangelicals are committing crimes against anyone then they should be subjected to secular legal penalties. But religious groups are voluntary organisations. No one should feel obliged to submit to any church if they're in basic disagreement with its teachings about sexual behaviour or anything else.
The Anglican way is obviously for families to remain within the Church for generations, but evangelical denominations exist for those who share a common belief or spiritual experience. Modernity means we don't have to be enslaved by what our parents do or believe.
Regarding Jamaica, the very existence of a debate suggests that the legal position may change, and in religious terms there are mainstream options for Christians who would rather not have to sing homophobic choruses at church(!). There are clergy and others there who have spoken out against homophobia and related violence.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Starlight:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
It doesn't need a singer nor a moral theologian to be influential. Anyone who is close to God will inevitably do it. The sung word is just as much an expression of one's encounter with God (and response to that) as is an academic tome from a moral theologian. More people are likely to understand the former anyway.
I think that sums up well the massive failings of evangelicalism in general - under the guise of spirituality and zeal, stupidity and ignorance is placed above knowledge. Yup. That's the evangelicalism we've all come to know and love. What need for facts or truth when you've got gut feelings? And if those gut feelings tell you to hate gay people, well if must be God telling you that right? And if you can find a verse in the bible which vaguely looks like it justifies your gut feelings on first glance, well then you know you're right! (Not that you had any uncertainty before, of course, because that would be "doubt" and as an evangelical you know that doubt is bad. (James 1:6))
Firstly, I don't recognise that as a characteristic of "evangelicalism in general" - of some branches of evangelicalism yes, but not "in general". There are good, great evangelical thinkers (whether or not you agree with them) who have thought about stuff and not just gone with their "gut instinct". Yes, I guess they would ultimately say that you must submit your intellect to Scripture and the guidance of the Spirit and yes, there does sometimes seem to be a worrying anti-intellectualism in some branches of evangelicalism. But it's far from general or universal.
(In short: please people, stop generalising about evangelicals: we're a hugely mixed bunch).
Secondly, I think this does a disservice to the power of music to work at multiple levels, including the intellect. One of my Bible tutors at college, who was both a (good) preacher and a songwriter, as well as being very intelligent and far from con-evo, reckoned that the songs he wrote did much to more get across the ideas he wanted to say than the sermons he preached. Hymns have a long and honourable history of being used to teach faith in the church. You yourself point out the use of hymns in Jamaica to inculculate a homophobic attitude in worshippers. Hymns and songs have fantastic power, for good or ill and this doesn't need to be antagonistic to thinking, facts etc. at all.
Thirdly, in the context of this discussion, it seems kind of irrelevant since Vicky Beeching (the songwriter in question) is pro-SSM and (AFAIK) not currently writing songs, though I may be wrong on that point.
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
Secondly, I think this does a disservice to the power of music to work at multiple levels, including the intellect. One of my Bible tutors at college, who was both a (good) preacher and a songwriter, as well as being very intelligent and far from con-evo, reckoned that the songs he wrote did much to more get across the ideas he wanted to say than the sermons he preached. Hymns have a long and honourable history of being used to teach faith in the church. You yourself point out the use of hymns in Jamaica to inculculate a homophobic attitude in worshippers. Hymns and songs have fantastic power, for good or ill and this doesn't need to be antagonistic to thinking, facts etc. at all.
Oh yes, totally. IMO sermons in themselves are, on the whole, a pretty ineffective teaching method, whereas songs, poetry and probably other art forms too are highly memorable and influential. *Dismounts hobby horse*
--------------------
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
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
Secondly, I think this does a disservice to the power of music to work at multiple levels, including the intellect. One of my Bible tutors at college, who was both a (good) preacher and a songwriter, as well as being very intelligent and far from con-evo, reckoned that the songs he wrote did much to more get across the ideas he wanted to say than the sermons he preached. Hymns have a long and honourable history of being used to teach faith in the church. You yourself point out the use of hymns in Jamaica to inculculate a homophobic attitude in worshippers. Hymns and songs have fantastic power, for good or ill and this doesn't need to be antagonistic to thinking, facts etc. at all.
Oh yes, totally. IMO sermons in themselves are, on the whole, a pretty ineffective teaching method, whereas songs, poetry and probably other art forms too are highly memorable and influential. *Dismounts hobby horse*
I'm a preacher, so I'm... not going there... (though for me, preaching =/= teaching - at least not entirely)
slinks slowly away
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
Heh, fair enough Stejjie!
--------------------
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
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Vicky Beeching is a new name to me - I'd never heard of her until this thread. As a result, I Googled her, and got a link to an article in "Christianity Today" which talks about her support of SSM. Sadly, every time I try to go there my entire pc freezes. Am I under spiritual attack, do you think?
You didn't miss much.
She says very little but repeats herself and her views are based on emotion rather than reason.
--------------------
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
|
|
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Vicky Beeching is a new name to me - I'd never heard of her until this thread. As a result, I Googled her, and got a link to an article in "Christianity Today" which talks about her support of SSM. Sadly, every time I try to go there my entire pc freezes. Am I under spiritual attack, do you think?
You didn't miss much.
She says very little but repeats herself and her views are based on emotion rather than reason.
I'm not sure why you feel the need to be so rude about her, particularly given that she, er, agrees with you re SSM.
--------------------
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 leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
Lex cantandi, lex credendi...
Vicky Beeching is more than a singer, no? A prominent writer of worship songs or hymns being as influential as a preacher wouldn't have been considered unusual to the Wesleys, I'm sure.
Which is why elements of evangelicalism are dangerous and based upon emotion.
Irrational feelings like homophobia can be whipped up through music.
'Worship songs' that are all about 'me' whip up selfishness and smugness.
Except that Beeching is for marriage equality and her songs are not 'all about 'me''
.
Give me an undivided heart Just say the word and I will be changed Lord I want to know what moves you
Um, that's one song out of many. And given her lack of homophobia, it's certainly not whipping up that.
Sorry Leo, but your posts are just coming across as nasty and uninformed prejudice. It sounds like you think Beeching is wrong (even though she's for SSM) just because she's a writer of worship songs. Just because they're not your thing doesn't make them bad.
--------------------
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 Jade Constable:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
Lex cantandi, lex credendi...
Vicky Beeching is more than a singer, no? A prominent writer of worship songs or hymns being as influential as a preacher wouldn't have been considered unusual to the Wesleys, I'm sure.
Which is why elements of evangelicalism are dangerous and based upon emotion.
Irrational feelings like homophobia can be whipped up through music.
'Worship songs' that are all about 'me' whip up selfishness and smugness.
Except that Beeching is for marriage equality and her songs are not 'all about 'me''
.
Give me an undivided heart Just say the word and I will be changed Lord I want to know what moves you
Um, that's one song out of many. And given her lack of homophobia, it's certainly not whipping up that.
If you follow the link you'll see that they are 'me' sentiments from 3 different songs.
It's interesting that some churches are like synagogues in that the cantor gets more attention than the rabbi.
--------------------
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
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
1. It doesn't need a singer nor a moral theologian to be influential. Anyone who is close to God will inevitably do it. ...
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Stop the car, put it in park, and set the emergency brake. You may want to qualify that -- otherwise I'll start naming influential people and asking you how close to God you think they are.
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
I think that you might need to apply the handbrake here, SM. It is a logical fallacy to argue that, because all the members of set A have a certain characteristic, say, being influential, therefore all individuals bearing that characteristic are members of set A
--------------------
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
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
Leo, I'm really struggling to understand the constant snipes at Vicky Beeching's songwriting, given a) it seems irrelevant to the subject at hand and b) she's on your side in this argument .
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
Any change within the church will need a broad coalition, like that behind equal ordination. Surely a popular evangelical songwriter coming out for marriage equality is a gift?
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
Leo, I'm really struggling to understand the constant snipes at Vicky Beeching's songwriting, given a) it seems irrelevant to the subject at hand and b) she's on your side in this argument .
It's not the song writer I am concerned about.
It is the notion that, in evangelical circles, a songwriter should be seen to have more clout that a moral theologian.
--------------------
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
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
Leo, I'm really struggling to understand the constant snipes at Vicky Beeching's songwriting, given a) it seems irrelevant to the subject at hand and b) she's on your side in this argument .
It's not the song writer I am concerned about.
It is the notion that, in evangelical circles, a songwriter should be seen to have more clout that a moral theologian.
Then stop sniping at her songwriting, for goodness' sakes. It's completely irrelevant here.
And given that Beeching is doing a PhD in the theology and ethics of technology, I'd say that does make her a moral theologian as well as a songwriter.
I'm not sure why you are so offended that songwriters and hymnwriters have influence - it's been the case since at least Wesley. Regardless of what you think 'should' have influence, people naturally are influenced by what they sing in church - that's just normal, surely. Moral theologians do have clout in evangelical circles, just not Chalke for obvious reasons - so it's surely quite logical that someone who evangelicals considered 'one of them' would be more influential than someone they don't. And again, Beeching is on your side 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
|
|
|
|
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
I think I may have spotted a flaw in your reasoning there, leo.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
I can't believe the stupidity of this. Surely Richard Inwood and John Sentamu must know that this is a fight that they cannot win. No matter what happens with the appointment (and I would suspect that an employment tribunal would tan their hides over this naked discrimination), they will end up looking bigoted and nasty. They will also bring the C of E into further disrepute.
As hinted on Thinking Anglicans, someone should take out a CDM against Inwood (and probably Sentamu, too).
It is things like this that made me see that I could no longer remain in the C of E. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Southwell is quite an evangelical diocese. It is very difficult to find any MOTR or Anglo-Catholic churches at all, anywhere, so the acting Bishop of Southwell and Nottingham is not out of kilter with the area. The Bishop of Lincoln, however, is a patron of Changing Attitudes.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Gildas:
I think I may have spotted a flaw in your reasoning there, leo.
where?
Presumably that some patients will also be bigots and/or very pedantic about the licensing of their chaplains.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Southwell is quite an evangelical diocese. It is very difficult to find any MOTR or Anglo-Catholic churches at all, anywhere, so the acting Bishop of Southwell and Nottingham is not out of kilter with the area. The Bishop of Lincoln, however, is a patron of Changing Attitudes.
The whole point of having an episcopal church is, surely, consistency.
The Church of England seems to have descended into the worst of all worlds, with the worst kind of Balkanized congregationalism, not just in churches, but entire dioceses. All without congregationalism's democratic tradition. Priestcraft and special interests, what a toxic brew.
That's where tolerating the intolerant gets you. ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Meh, I agree, but no skin off my nose. I am no longer a member of any congregation, took myself off the electoral roll at the last update. I got fed up of saying "not in my name*" and remaining within the same church.
* homophobia and misogyny
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Meh, I agree, but no skin off my nose. I am no longer a member of any congregation, took myself off the electoral roll at the last update. I got fed up of saying "not in my name*" and remaining within the same church.
* homophobia and misogyny
And this is exactly why the church's clubby "let's all rub along, pass the port" schtick is killing it.
Tolerance for tolerance's sake isn't just amoral, it's unsustainable. The leadership can only afford to be easy-going when it doesn't affect them personally. When it does, as equal ordination hit Anglo-Catholics (and not half as hard as its absence had hit women), the patrician facade falls away like a cheap suit, and their fury erupts.
If they can't bring themselves to blackball the extremists, farewell clubhouse.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Gildas:
I think I may have spotted a flaw in your reasoning there, leo.
where?
If the patients are of all faiths and none then neither a C of E minister in good standing nor an independent can be said to be representative.
That said, if the NHS, tells the Diocese of Southwell to get knotted and appoints Fr. Pemberton anyway my sympathies will be with the NHS.
I would be interested to know how many evo. parishes in the Diocese of Southwell would be inclined to withhold their parish share, in the event that they perceived their Diocesan to be soft on gay marriage. Quite a lot, would be my guess.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Try
Shipmate
# 4951
|
Posted
It appears that there is now a postcode lottery in place when it comes to gay married clergy in the Church of England. This is not a desireable system - we in TEC had one both for LGBT people and ordained women for years, and the principal effect was to balkenize the Church and make people feel that the church was being arbitrary and unfair. Nevertheless, it's clear that Fr. Pemberton cannot remain an Anglican priest and minister in Nottingham. One option would be for Fr. Pemberton to transfer his orders to the Metropolitan Community Church before taking up his new position. He'd be a free church chaplain then, not an Anglican, but the NHS would not have to choose between employing a chaplain without any ecclesiastical endorsement or discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation.
--------------------
“I’m so glad to be a translator in the 20th century. They only burn Bibles now, not the translators!” - the Rev. Dr. Bruce M. Metzger
Posts: 852 | From: Beautiful Ohio, in dreams again I see... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
It's the post code lottery aspect which will damage the C of E's position if this gets to an employment tribunal. Whilst the C of E might just get away with this if it were a blanket treatment, the fact that Jeremy Pemberton still has a licence in Lincoln Diocese highlights the patent injustice of the present situation. When you add to the fact that this action has been done with no formal process and with no possibility of appeal, it leaves the C of E in a very tricky position.
I hope Rev Pemberton DOESN'T jump ship (not that I think it is a possibility). If he were to back down, it would leave the C of E in a position when it had "won" and would feel able to do the same thing to others. At some point, the bishops need to be brought to account for this. As many have indicated, there are hints that a lot of bishops are unhappy with the present Pastoral Guidance and that they feel they were "bounced" into agreeing it. I suspect that many only agreed to it on the tacit understanding that it wouldn't be enacted upon. Certainly, most bishops I know (not that I know many) would be deeply uncomfortable at the present situation and highly embarrassed that they might be thought to have approved of this action by Richard Inwood.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
@ Try,
I think it's by no means a given that Jeremy Pemberton will notget PTO in Nottingham Diocese, if we remember that the post of Diocesan Bishop is vacant. At some stage, that post will have to be filled. If it is filled by someone for whom the concept of natural justice has meaning, then I suspect that + Richard will find himself dropped like a hot brick, whether or not ++Sentamu is the source of the recent actions. The trouble with defending the indefensible is that it is a position that eventually becomes, well, indefensible.
--------------------
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
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
The problem with that is that there is a backlog of diocesan appointments. As far as I know it will be some months before a new Bishop is named, let alone be in situ. I'm guessing we're talking 12 months and then some. Jeremy Pemberton can't wait that long and I doubt that the NHS will, either.
I have no doubt that this decision will be reversed in some way. And when it does, Richard Inwood will become the fall guy, even though it seems very unlikely that, as interim bishop, he would have taken this decision without reference to ABY.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Rather than people just sitting around waiting for either ++Ebor or +Inwood to come to their senses, perhaps we should encourage the good people in the area where Jeremy Pemberton works to be more pro-active.
So, they should write to the bishop(s) and ask if they really think their view of legal SSM is more important than their dying relatives potentially being denied the sacrament.
And then publish the resulting correspondence.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
