An interesting day today - Olympics, Carrell and Tinker

Our worship this morning was an All Ages service in which we looked at the Olympics for how it speaks about the Christian journey. We focused on Hebrews and verses which describe how we must keep our eyes on Jesus, who both began and finished the race we're in. We thought about how we must focus on how he did it; understanding that he never lost sight of where he was headed...Hebrews 12: 1-3 in The Message. He suffered along the way but in the sure hope of eternal glory.

Our children made and waved flags and loved watching the animals on a worship Africa DVD. There was a drama, intercessions and beautiful music and a stimulating sermon. St Nicks does what it says on the can - all ages really is all ages and in fact our children are catered for in every service and this doesn't mean that they have to leave the service - they can if they want to for a group next door but when they want to stay with mum and dad they can bring grab bags full of toys and paper to the pews or they're encouraged to produce something at the front which encapsulates the sermon - ie they're absorbing the words but are focused also on making something that helps to reinforce its message in a way that they will understand. Well done St Nicks - this is church for the whole family - it's intellectually edifying, spiritually stretching and quenching and family uniting!

On the blog front, I've been contacted by Peter Carrell of Anglican Down Under and Mevin Tinker. I look at Peter Carrell's site quite a bit. I have to say I very much admire his left hand column - his profile points to Jesus rather than himself and his presuppositions are cleverly, precisely and gently articultated. I think I share similar presuppositions:


This blog is conservative evangelical in perspective. It presupposes that the ordination of women is consonant with Scripture. It understands Scripture to set out through Old and New Testaments an ethic for sexual relationships which expects celibacy or marriage of followers of Jesus Christ. It recognises that these understandings are not shared by all in the Anglican Communion; and further recognises that although some in the Communion are woefully ignorant and dismissive of Scripture, nevertheless there are others who engage with Scripture with zeal and integrity yet through a different interpretation arrive at different understandings. Thus the final presupposition to be noted here is that Scripture is authoritative for Anglicans, yet interpretation means the application of that authority to human conduct involves genuine questions, some of which do not yield, or do not yet yield common answers.

Archbishop Rowan Williams speaks
to make clear something that can get very much obscured in the rhetoric about ‘inclusion’, this is not and should never be a question about the contribution of gay and lesbian people as such to the Church of God and its ministry, about the dignity and value of gay and lesbian people. Instead it is a question, agonisingly difficult for many, as to what kinds of behaviour a Church that seeks to be loyal to the Bible can bless, and what kinds of behaviour it must warn against – and so it is a question about how we make decisions corporately with other Christians, looking together for the mind of Christ as we share the study of the Scriptures.

About me
Peter Carrell
I am not important, but Jesus is! His profile is found in the Gospels.


Darren said...

This may sound (is!) perdantic.

Melvin Tinker is Vicar of St John's Newlands, Hull.

You are right Reform is totally reactionary, which is it's great weakness. BUT all this Reform bashing - doesn't it get tiring? Most Reform members I know are actually quite a laugh and life affirming. Just try cracking a joke at Diocesan Synod and then in a Reform meeting and see the difference.

Also people don't seem to get the difference between "Reform" the organisation & "Reformed" the theological position.

Not all Reform members or those theologically reformed are pendants... but clearly some are.

Rachel said...

I apologise Darren, if my postings have caused you to feel that I am 'Reform-bashing' - this was certainly never my intention. I would never want to verbally 'bash' anyone. I have been 'exploring' Reform and don't sit comfortably inside their world view because I feel it is reactionary rather than affirming and it feels as though the Church of England, which I think I feel rather protective of, is lost and in need of their help.

I am aware that people inside Reform can have a laugh - as we all can. John Richardson has been known to crack the odd joke or two, I'm sure, and I really like the guy, despite the fact that I disagree with some of his views. As for cracking a joke at Diocesan Synod and then a Reform meeting, this is something I can not comment upon, having been to neither. I guess you are possibly in a better position than me to understand atmosphere in these two contexts. I appreciate the confusion over Reformed and Reform and that the two are not to be confused.

Thank you for your comment. Perhaps you would be so kind as to tell me a little bit about yourself. Do you have a blog?

God bless and sorry you perceived my views as negative. I'm glad you voiced this.

Darren said...

Sorry if I seemed a bit negative/touchy - I just find some of it a bit boring & disconnected from reality. John's humour is dry & can be very witty. However I must just be mad, as I keep going back and reading this stuff! (not yours - that's a new thing - but Fulcrum etc. which is purely defined by being not-Reform)

I don't have a blog - I seem to loose enough time looking at others! I'm a Vicar in a small Urban Church in merseyside, married with a son. I've got a passion for Church growth, Evangelism & mission. I'm also convinced that the Gospel is the means God uses to transform communities as he changes the people in it, person by person & family by family.

I also like real ale, fine red wine, football, rugby, Eddie Izzard and films with explosions.

Rachel said...

Hi Darren
Thank you - it's so nice to connect with the person and not just views without a face, if you're with me.

I'm right at the beginning of my journey - going to study theology and ministry as an independent student in Oct. I was previously a secondary school teacher. I feel very called to the church which might mean I simply continue in my voluntary capacity, who knows. College might change things. I'm still exploring the church - 'the institution' and blog and read other people's blogs in oreer to understand it. Of course, the church - the people - is waht I really love and I'm really alive in the more practical mission based things that I do and feel that some of my wonderings and explorings are more intellectually than spiritually stimulating but it's all been interesting, particularly looking at Lambeth for the first time ever.

My husband and I are working on a youth website for launching a group in September so when it's ready, you might like to give me the benefit of your experience and make some suggestions. My husband and I like Eddie Izzard too - there's a very funny sketch on youtube I'll post up for you.

Love Rachel

Darren said...

I couldn't get the clip to work, but if It's C of E, death or cake - class!

Rachel said...

Cake or death. Yes - it's funny isn't it. Should be working now. I've found your stuff on Fulcrum threads but in some of the comments, I must admit, you sound a bit cross. Fulcrum folks can get a bit heated can't they. Heat and light I guess and it makes for stimulating reading.

Darren said...

yeah, sorry. Can't do tone of voice here. I suppose I put things quite factually and bluntly. People don't like that. Just preparing a sermon on Amos 7, just look at Amaziah's response to Amos (not that I'm comparing myself to Amos, other than both from semi-rural backgrounds from the south, ministering in a more built up area in the North).

What does get me cross though, is that everything I've said on Fulcrum is taken personally (just as Amaziah did!), Reform types are criticised for criticising!!!! THEN they start having ago about people's personality! They seem to get upset that some people are implying they're not proper Evangelicals, while they are implying that we're not proper people!

So the conversation (to me) looks like this:

CE: I think x is right, y is wrong. On this one I think you're wrong.

Fulcrum: So you're saying I'm a bad person - we'll you're grumpy and boring!

One person even said that they thought homosexuality is wrong, but not in a Reform way!!!! What does that mean? Interestingly, I notice that L Roberts has walked away from the postings, in part because he/she is hurt by the way Fulcrum people speak. So we're all guilty of hurting people. Someone may say the truth hurts, I'd say -exactly!

When I was interviewed at Trinity, I met up with an old pal there and we chatted with others in the common room. There was a bit of Reform bashing going on. I said I was "1 of them", they were shocked, "but you're a nice bloke". When chatted on why I'd recently joint (10years + ago now) they agreed with me on just about everything. But then said they didn't agree with the way Reform said it (but the way I said it was fine). I asked how were they saying it? They weren't. And when we put it in print, even like I am now, it seems quite jagged and uncomfortable.

Short point - There is a time to deal with people. There is a time to deal with their words and not get personal.

E.g. Just read a bit of 1 of your links. Very rude about Mark Driscolls lack of logic. But in a posting that I thought was pretty logic free, if I were to say that I'd be held up as the devil himself.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...


A little background reading so we might mutually flourish when there are different opinions