Sunday, 14 February 2010

Un-Like Minded?

I am currently being engaged by colleagues who claim that 'difference' is good and that unity is not unity but one, dominant, side subjugating the other. The focus of their comments are grounded in their feeling that the liberals are being swamped and oppressed to keep the Church looking united.

I wondered if this was a minority view and as I did, Tom Butler (retiring Bishop of Southwark) popped up on Radio Four (07:30ish) and spoke of his sadness in the way that Rowan had treated the Jeffrey John debacle. John, incase you've forgotten was set to become bishop of reading until voices were raised about his same-sex relationship. Butler, speaking of this said that as John had been in a, "Stable, faithful, long-term relationship," and therefore should have been given the job. Tom continued by expressing concerns that the Episcopalian Church (TEC) might 'float away' thanks to the work of Evangelicals.

I am finding an increase in the term 'un-like minded'. This is the holy grail of being a Church universal. I notice that there's even a leader in the 'Church Times' which speaks of this and how the restraint shown (I am struggling to see where) by TEC is an invitation to dialogue. It also wishes to deny that liberalisation of the CofE puts others at risk and so it's obvious where the spin is taking us in that article isn't it?

Jesus, if I understand the words of John 17:21 correctly, appears to wish for something that is not different but very much the same, at least in mind, and so I get a little confused at this trend. ("That they may be one, just as you, the Father, and I in you, they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.")

I personally am happy for difference, this is what denominations bring us and confirm. Difference is good, but not so much difference within the same body, this is neither healthy nor designed to promote Christianity in anything but contentious ways. I am firmly of the opinion that some of those who wish to have a church which is not subjugated by tradition in terms of interpretation of the Scriptures and practice are actually in need of creating their own denomination or grouping. There is room for another group and this would mean that both sides, the majority centre and the evangelicals on one side and the liberals on the other, could co-exist and be in communion where this is possible and exist within their own difference elsewhere.

It's time to stop looking at expelling people, by force as in TEC or morally and ecclesiastically here, and start looking at convincing people that although a minority, liberals are not the majority of the CofE, they are not subjugated by evangelicals and traditionalists, this is actually the reality for smaller (different) groups who rise up within a movement.

If they are so right then they will have no fear that setting up their own entity would flourish and they could satisfy their 'un-like mindedness' in a consistent and revised Christian faith where Frank and Ernest can be viewed as the right condition for marriage and whatever else they'd like to sanctify. Not only would they be free but Christians in Malaysia and Nigeria (to name but two places - and there's many more) would also be safe.

So a word to those liberals - what you have is wonderful, so why waste your pearls with swines, go start a place where everyone agrees and no one subjugates you and then perhaps we will all be free to serve Christ as we see Him.

Bye! (go to go do first service of the day :-)  )


Postscript.  I do support the right of any group to explore 'other realities' but I also feel it is churlish, having done so to expect this new reality to be adopted or incorporated into the original when the real reality is that it's as  logical as developing vegetarianism and expecting it to be the rule for a formerly meat eating corpus. It's naive at best and arrogant and self-seeking at worst. I wish that these revisionists would have the integrity to take their new branch of Church and make it such in a formal way - this way we might all progress and unlike mindedness could serve a real and positive purpose.

No comments: