Part 272. Don Cupitt

When visiting a Church of England vicar in the early 1990s I commented that one might discern when a priest was ordained by looking at their bookshelf heaving with volumes acquired at theological college but little or nothing published since. Not so said the vicar directing me to books written by Don Cupitt. He added that his views, and those of many of his fellow priests, accorded with those of Cupitt, but he would not admit to it publicly.  

Very little mention is made of Cupitt today in progressive, deconstructive or liberal theological circles which is a shame given the major influence he had on the thinking in said circles.  He embraces the postmodern and the influence of Ludwig Wittgenstein and Jacques Derrida is clear in his writings. A non-realist Cupitt denies the existence of an independent metaphysical God. There are no objective truths, there is only our language and from that the meanings and interpretations humanity has developed.  In the words attributed to Jesus we discover our own understanding that many construe as a liberating force for good.

It is in this context I commend the article by Colin Coward that follows. Beautifully composed, it is, to my mind  a powerful and persuasive argument for non-realist thinking and progressive theology.

Unadulterated Love

Transformational Christian Life

Colin Coward April 23, 2024

I was born in 1945. As I’ve recounted before, in 1957 aged eleven I was intuitively confident that I desired the company of other boys, knowing that the other boys in my class were being attracted to girls. I rejected what I understood to be the taboos of my family, my church, Christian teaching, Biblical authority and the authority of God that desire for someone of the same sex was abhorrent to God, sinful, an abomination. My arrogant independence of mind meant that in rejecting the teaching of all these authorities I was determining that the Church, the Bible and God were in the wrong when they condemned my sexuality and my emotional desires. 

Five or so years later and certainly prior to my eighteenth birthday, the result of my rejection of what conservatives name as orthodox, traditional, Biblical teaching in relation to homosexuality meant that I had carved out a freedom myself to question everything else in the teaching of the Church that didn’t make sense. It was a huge relief when Honest to God was published because I already knew that I didn’t believe that God was a being or that Bible stories of a virgin birth, angels, miracles and appearance after death were accounts of things that actually happened. Despite this, I had been confirmed and was deeply involved in the life of my local church and later in the life of the diocese. A decade and a half later I was accepted for training as an Anglican priest. No questions were asked about my faith or my sexuality. Theological college initiated in me an increasingly deep and personally important contemplative spiritual life. The foundations of my experiential, contemplative, activist faith were enhanced and deepened by my practical experience as a curate and parish priest in the 1970s and 80s.

It was the quality of life and the friendship of people in my parish church and diocesan networks who nourished and inspired me. My church social, theological and intellectual life was rich and energised. The Christian community and my network of friendships were more important than anything else. I learnt by experience that Christian life woven around the Gospel message of Jesus Christ was the way in which the lives of individuals, communities and human societies were being inspired and transformed. 

 It was obvious to me that either everything about Christian faith had to be true or that little or nothing was true. In my forties I decided to live “as if” everything was true, not believing that all the events and stories recounted in the Bible were literally true. . I committed myself to live “as if” it was true because the practical life of the church was good and nourishing. I didn’t know for sure what was and wasn’t true about Christian teaching. There was great beauty and power in the metaphors, mythical stories and wisdom teachings, yes, but my conviction of the value of Christian faith and life was rooted in my personal experience and intuition.

Non-realist faith

I had what I would now understand to be a non-realist, non-theistic, humanistic religious faith. It was faith not in the doctrines and dogmas of the Christian Church but in a way of life exemplified by Jesus and manifest in the Gospel accounts of his life, teaching, wisdom and practice. I did not believe in a supernatural, interventionist God. Freedom within the Church of England to believe in God in this way was its great, spacious gift to me. I recognised in the Church of England’s Jesus a person who set out to recruit a group of men and women to whom he gave the freedom to think differently. They had the insight and courage to continue to think and live differently after he was crucified.

Today’s Church of England is a deeply troubled institution. As a contemplative, spiritual gay man, I am less secure now in trusting that the Church provides a safe, nourishing, enriching, healthy environment in which to live and explore faith. It is no longer obvious that today’s God and Jesus are trustworthy inspirations for healthy, spiritual, nourishing Christian faith. Prejudice and abuse have become systemic. The overcoming of prejudice and discrimination against women and LGBTQIA+ and black and disabled and disempowered people is no longer a fundamental element of Christian life, faith and vision.

This contemporary reality has driven me to re-examine my Christian basics. What is “God”? What is “God” really like? Is it no longer acceptable to live “as if” Jesus’ teaching about the essence of God in the Gospels is true? The Church of England now has great difficulty distinguishing between healthy and unhealthy patterns of life, behaviour and belief; between healthy and unhealthy theologies, constructs of God and understandings of the wisdom, teaching and life of Jesus of Nazareth.

I can see the changes that have taken place over the nearly eight decades of my life with greater clarity now, mapping the more recent changes in our Anglican ideas about God. The essence of hope for the future lies in the wisdom and lives of people on Earth. This is the only place where wisdom and Mystery can ever come to be known – and will always be evolving.

Our individual human responsibility

The most important value in any religion lies in its ability to affect the quality of our lives for better and not for worse; not to indoctrinate us with a belief system, creeds and dogmas, but to open us to our personal glory as created, conscious beings living on a finite planet in a universe with apparently infinite dimensions. Religions are doing “the work of God”, nurturing the divine energy of creation and evolution, when they are providing people with the resources and nourishment to grow and flourish, to know ourselves well, to become compassionate, integrated, emotionally aware, relational, loving, self-giving, visionary people. What God is “like”, therefore, is like the something that informs and inspires our individual lives. That something is, of course, the medium within which we are born, live and grow; our parents and extended family, our immediate social network and society, our culture, our location and moment in history, our education and religious background. All these elements are variable and uncertain, fragile, subject to human insecurities and prejudices, sometimes toxic, sometimes deeply creative and healthy. We can too easily become entrenched in our cultural norms and values, emotionally dependent, addicted to our dominant tribal conditioning. Our freedom to develop a healthy spiritual life and practice is essential, incorporating self-examination and reflection, self-awareness, contemplation, learning to nourish and value the essences of love, goodness, wisdom, truth, justice and compassion with which each of us is endowed.

Listen to everything until it all belongs together and you are part of it

Three decades ago I moved from being a parish priest to become a full-time campaigner, a ‘contemplative activist’, three decades in which the conceptual environment of the world in which I live has changed dramatically. The reality of evolution has become integral to my world view and my conception of Christian faith. More recently, the seamless nature of everything in creation has become a vital theme. We are born into an evolving universe and over the course of our lives our faith and the faith of the Church will continue to evolve. We are part of a seamless whole, coinherent, co-creators in life. Whether we are conscious of this or not, we are seamlessly involved with all members of the human community, embedded as we are in the emergent environment of our fragile biosphere.

Our Christian foundations of faith are always evolving, “shaking” as Paul Tillich noted eighty years ago. The seamless reality of creation and life of which we are very slowly becoming aware is being strenuously resisted by reactionary movements in religion, politics and economics. Seamless awareness requires us to move beyond our inherited, traditional, orthodox models of dogma and doctrine towards more human and humane, experiential, inclusive, relational models. Progressive Christian movements understand that the new seamless vision of life requires us to reappraise our inherited models of human gender and sexuality. The foundations of Christian faith are enshrined in the concept known as God, revealed in the life of Jesus Christ and manifest in the mystical presence of the Holy Spirit. In the evolving seamless awareness of all matter and life in creation, I find in Jesus’ life, wisdom, teaching, practice, parables and relationships, a model for the values and ideals common to the necessary wisdom and health of all humanity. The ultimate seamless harmony of all faith traditions has to exemplify and seek the well-being of every individual life and of our mutual lives on this planet. Human flourishing is the path to which we are all called.

Institutional religions and the institutional Church are finding this evolutionary step, the call to listen to everything until it all belongs together and we are part of it, very difficult to imagine, let alone adjust to and integrate in its teaching and practice. Sexuality, gender, inequality, economic injustice, the climate crisis, how people function and malfunction, emotionally, physically and spiritually, the well-being of our planet and environment, globalisation, artificial intelligence and the manipulation of what we take to be reality, dysfunctional political and spiritual leadership, are all requiring us to make sometimes massive adjustments to our lives in faith.

Part 271. Further musings.

Those who peruse my Facebook pages:

John Hopkinson Theology &

Theology of Social Justice 

will have noted I seek to understand and  promote what it means in a Christian context to campaign for systemic change in society to tackle the issues of poverty, discrimination and marginalisation.  I have been influenced strongly by the 

 of Oscar Romero, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Martin Luther King Jnr, Desmond Tutu, Leonardo Boff and Gustavo Gutierrez et al.  Reading their work is both humbling and exhilarating as they developed a theological basis for campaigning to change established political, economic and social orders. 

We really must go beyond acting as bringers of relief through such activities as foodbanks, debt advice, homelessness hostels etc, etc.  I do not belittle any activity which brings relief at the point of need. It is essential activity done in love for humanity. However as Desmond Tutu said: we must stop pulling people out of the river and find out why they are falling in and put a stop to it. In other words, prevention is better than cure. But there is more to do than repair faults in existing structures.  We need to promote wholesale root-and-branch change, a paradigm shift in attitudes and actions in society. As did Jesus.

Jesus was no armchair critic nor, as we describe it now 'a keyboard warrior'. He was out in the community: disputing, engaging, orating and doing. Love in action.

So how do we act? How do we overcome  bigotry, hatred, destitution, misogyny, homophobia, discrimination and marginalisation?  In my opinion we have to mount challenges to those holding the levers of political and economic power. We have to engage and campaign for systemic change which inevitably involves changing priorities and redistribution of resources.

We should welcome working with secular organisations in campaigning for a common cause.  

It is not easy. We have to be prepared for the long-haul, to hitting brick walls, to being abused and derided. Our faith, our belief in loving our neighbour, gives us the strength to continue.  Following Jesus is not easy. He demanded we pick up our cross daily and follow him.

Part 270. Musings

No longer do I claim to be a Christian. I describe myself as a follower of the teaching of Jesus.  The recorded teaching is in the synoptic gospels, the books of Matthew, Mark and Luke. We have to be mindful that the texts of the three books probably are evidence of an oral tradition that developed following the death of Jesus, and also now lost earlier documents.  What we do know is that the three books are not contemporary to the time of Jesus and are not verbatim reports of the words of Jesus.  It is important to understand the historical context of the synoptic gospels and the underlying motivation of each author.  We bring our own understanding to the words of literature and I acknowledge the contribution of postmodernists such as Jacques Derrida.

My understanding of the teaching of Jesus is not based on the myth of inerrancy nor on a literalist reading of texts. Rather, we should engage in seeking to ascertain the principles to be discerned from the reported actions and words of Jesus.

My starting point for this seeking is the two great commandments that may be summarised succinctly  as Love God, love others. Simple yet profound.

God is beyond our comprehension. God should not be anthropomorphised, not given human attributes. God is in all things including us.  We should love: our world, all humanity. We should be in wonder of the universe: of all creation. God is the great unknown, filling the void our minds cannot comprehend. But God is not some great judge in the sky. Such a god is a human creation designed to coerce individuals to behave in ways specified by those with power to enforce their will. 

Let us consider God's kingdom of heaven as a human construct, as an ideal. Jesus calls on us to follow him and work to bring this ideal on earth: make an ideal a reality. This ideal is grounded in love for all humanity, for inclusiveness, for justice. Read the bible through the lens of love. His message incurred the wrath of the economic, political and religious establishments. He dared to upset the settled order, to call out oppressors, sentries and gatekeepers.  He was a radical yet peaceful revolutionary. The fair society was to be achieved through love: not through violence.

The message is clear. Following Jesus requires us to challenge the causes of poverty, discrimination and marginalisation. It is essential to confront those wielding power and demand systemic change.  Many who profess to be Christians have retreated into a private piety bubble chasing the chimera of Pauline theology rather than face up to the challenge set by Jesus. Many seek to have a foot in each camp. Who is to say one path is preferable to others?  Certainly not me. Belief is a personal matter, not to be imposed by conditions set by others.

Part 269. Jottings.

I rarely attend services at my local Salvation Army Corps and I have stopped attending bible study meetings. I miss listening to the brass band at services and discussion at bible studies. I ceased attending as I no longer believe in the theology and doctrine of the Army and am dismayed at the stance on LBGTQ+ issues summarised as "inclusive at the door, exclusive at the core".

The people at the Corps are most welcoming. I attend the weekly lunch club and activities such as sales.  I am impressed by the social work of the Army but feel it should do much more campaigning on social issues. I have been an Adherent for ten years but do wonder how long I can continue. 2024 may see  major changes  in position on the criteria for officership in the United Kingdom & Ireland Territory and if that be the case I shall probably not resign. 

Part 268. Well said Bel Cassie

An interesting article by Bel Cassie. I concur with the thrust of the article.

'I’m a “let’s just get it done right now” person. And the whole narrative around how long any kind of organisational or systemic change takes, is quite frankly exhausting. Especially when barriers appear to be consistently erected instead of eradicated. 

So what’s the middle space that we can meet in? Where is the point of ‘compromise’ that keeps the advocates from losing heart without pushing those who are not “ready” too far beyond their capacity too quickly*? I have some thoughts. Education is a place to start. And the creation of safe spaces in which to have the conversations that matter without fear of recrimination. And I don’t think “opt in - this tool is available for you to utilise if you are interested” is going to cut it anymore. When it comes to diversity and inclusion - across the spectrum (meaning all minority groups, disability, multicultural AND LGBTQI+), at this juncture in history education and training are vital. So, I’m game if you are, let’s have the conversation. If the spaces aren’t provided, let’s create them.'

*I would argue that there comes a time when people need to be pushed into discomfort, whether they are ready or not, if meaningful change, change that is edifying and affirming - even if it is scary, is going to occur

Part 267. Human Rights.

A definition taken from Wikipedia.

Human rights are moral principles, or norms, for certain standards of behaviour and are regularly protected as substantive rights in substantive law, municipal and international law.

The United Nations claims as one of its great achievements  the creation of a comprehensive body of human rights laws.

The United Nations charter is persuasive but not legally binding. In the UK the Human Rights Act 1998 gives legal effect to the European Convention of Human Rights and therefore is legally binding on  the courts with a right of appeal to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

ECHR judges have engaged in judicial creativity to expand the range of activities covered by the Convention (a recent case has brought environment/climate change within its ambit). The Convention has taken on a life of its own divorced from the supposed intention of its original authors, in much the same way as the meaning of USA Constitution  has been moulded by the judiciary.

The UN states human rights are rights inherent to all human beings. But are they Inherent? Is this simply a nod in the direction of natural law and natural rights theories, or a deliberate intention to claim some natural or metaphysical basis for human rights?  Bentham was in no doubt, any attempt to invest human rights with a natural law underpinning was a 'nonsense'.

Our concept of what are human rights might well be influenced by moral values based on religious beliefs. However it is a mistake to believe that religious moral values are God given and by extension  natural values. Scripture is human understanding of God. It is not inerrant nor to be interpreted literally. 

Part 266. I concur.

This article. posted on the Facebook page Kissing Fish Book  is deserving of wide publication. I believe the author to be Roger Wolsey.  The post articulates arguments with which i concur.

"A big part of why many are leaving the Church is because they aren’t aware of progressive Christianity or progressive Christian congregations. Granted, this isn’t the only reason – but it’s tragic that so many folks aren’t aware that there is a form of the faith that many of them would actually like a lot.

Whether or not there is a literal heaven, we are Christians not for the sake of some future reward/glory, but rather for the sake of living faithfully to Jesus and his Way here and now — for the sake of experiencing and partaking in salvation/wholeness and the Kingdom of God here and now. Faith isn’t fire insurance to avoid going to “hell.” We seek to follow the religion *of* Jesus not the religion *about* him.

Progressive Christians believe that Jesus *is* “the way, the truth, and the life,” and we believe that all who follow Jesus’ teaching, Way, and example, by whatever name, and even if they’ve never even heard of Jesus, are fellow brothers and sisters in Christ and his Way.

That said, we’re rather enamored by the uniqueness of the Jesus story and we invite others to join us in sharing that specific journey — even if we feel no dire need to convert them.

It is this non-exclusive approach to our faith that many young adults find compelling. So we’re evangelistic even as we’re not.

Ultimately, let’s just be as faithful as we can and not worry about “the Church dying.” We have no fear of death for we follow a savior who gave it all up for the sake of others. Indeed, if we do anything to “attract” people out of desperation on our part, it’ll be fruitless. It’s like dating someone who is insecure and anxious — not attractive. Let’s just boldly be who were are — and maybe even more so — yes, more so.” ~ RW, author, K.F.

Part 265. Uncomfortable reading?

An interesting commentary by Major David Cavanagh, a major post holder in The Salvation Army.  I concur with the thrust of his comment.

'According to Alan Hirsch, Howard Snyder identifies “ministry to the poor” as a characteristic of apostolic movements, and cites The Salvation Army as an example of this. He further comments that movements almost always “involve” people at the grassroots level and actively “involve” the masses.

It seems to me that this conflates two rather different things. While The Salvation Army has always had a bias to the poor (ministry to/for the poor), in the early days this was carried out to some extent, by converts who witnessed to their peers. Today, in many settings, it is middle-class Salvationists who minister “to” the poor and deprived, who are passive recipients of these ministries, rather than being actively involved in them and caught up in the redeeming dynamic of personal transformation offers by the gospel…..if truth be told, these ministries are often directed by middle-class Salvationists and largely carried out by men and women of good will whose only connection to The Salvation Army and the gospel is through their volunteering.'

The commentary reflects my personal experience of a number of corps. Whilst one may quibble over what it means to be middle-class it is the case that many Salvationists have a much more comfortable lifestyle than the poor.  It is 'ambulance work': givers and recipients. However, we must be mindful of the caveats articulated in the commentary. The general thrust of the argument does not apply in all settings and there are examples of involvement and direction from within the community of the 'poor'.  That said there is a disconnect that the Army must strive to overcome if it is to rediscover its passion and motivation to bring the love of Jesus, spiritual and material, to those it seeks to serve.  The Salvation Army must be perceived to be of,   with and for  the communities it serves or wishes to serve. 

Part 264. Questions for the powerful.

Questions for those who hold the reins of power: politicians, financiers, economic leaders, judges, trade union leaders senior church figures, administrators.

Those who are powerful have to remember the litmus test that God gives to the powerful. What is your treatment of the poor, or the hungry?  What is your treatment of the vulnerable, or the voiceless?

Desmond Tutu 

As followers of Jesus we are to  challenge the powerful, we must challenge systemic social injustice, we must demand change.

Part 263. To love is to act. Mental assent alone is not enough.

Love is displayed by what we do, not by what we think. Jesus tells us to love our neighbours, not by intellectual assent alone but through action.  In other words it is not a question of paying lip service to the concept of love: it is a matter of showing love for others by doing, by action.

The 'doing' takes many forms. One is by providing face-to-face support to individuals in need. There are many acts of kindness including:  listening, empathising, advocacy, a friendly word. Or it may be meeting material needs: food, shelter clothing. Practical action at point of need.  

Many denominations engage in what has been described as 'ambulance work', patching up the wounded and sending them on their way. Alleviating symptoms but not tackling underlying causes. Let's be clear, this ambulance work is of vital importance providing essential support to people living in poverty or destitution,  people living in areas of multiple deprivation, individuals who are disadvantaged, marginalised or discriminated against. 

Followers of Jesus are called to do much  more. Not only to treat the symptoms but to demand changes to eradicate the causes. In other words systemic change. The reason Jesus was executed by the Roman authorities  was to take out a person they perceived as an agitator threatening to destabilise the country with his radical message of love and care for the poor, the marginalised and the disadvantaged. The Roman authorities wished to stamp out any serious threat to its rule and were aided and abetted by religious, business and religious leaders who saw Jesus as a major threat to political, economic and religious stability. And so the strand of theology developed laying claim to Jesus advocating systemic change in society through his command to love your neighbour.  Social justice is a key element of loving your neighbour. 

Many have followed the call of Jesus. Some have died for their opposition to the  the perpetrators of modern day examples of repression.. Think of  Oscar Romero, Martin Luther King Jnr  and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. We have seen the development of Liberation Theology and the work of Gustavo Gutierrez and Leonardo Boff. 

You may read much more on my Facebook pages: John Hopkinson Theology  and Theology of Social Justice.

Part 262. Kissing Fish Book article.

The following is an article from the Facebook page Kissing Fish Book published on 23.03.2024. The author is Roger Wolsley.  I commend it for your consideration.

“Good orthodoxy leads to good orthopraxy” is a common aphorism wielded among conservative evangelical and fundamentalist Christians. It’s frequently worded in a more aggressive manner: “without proper orthodoxy, there can be no proper Christian discipleship.” These claims intend to convey that unless people believe certain doctrines and dogmas – and in a literal way – they are incapable of engaging in doing good in the world. Moreover, such declarations also seek to convey that if, for some freakish reason, some humans do happen to engage in good acts in the world without giving intellectual consent to a proscribed set of truth claims, those good acts are accidents and “don’t count” - they aren’t enough to be saved (get into heaven).

Examples of these truth-claims that conservatives claim must be agreed with include:

- Jesus is literally God – one and the same.

- Jesus’s mother was literally a virgin when she birthed him.

- Jesus literally walked on water, turned water into wine, and raised people from the dead.

- God is all-powerful and intercedes in the world, performing literal miracles which defy the laws of physics.

- Jesus was born to be killed as the requisite sacrifice needed to atone for human sins, and that the literal shedding of his blood was necessary to meet this need (any form of execution that didn’t involve him bleeding would not have been sufficient).

These beliefs require subscribing to the theologies of supernatural theism and the penal or substitutionary theory of the atonement.

 

Progressive Christianity rejects both supernatural theism and the substitutionary theory of the atonement. Such rejections are considered blasphemous and heretical to conservative Christians, as they have no form of Christianity that doesn’t embrace those theologies. Such Christians have lived sheltered lives, oblivious to the reality that the 66 books of the (Protestant Bible) – convey an even greater number of theologies. They are uninformed about the variety of Christianities which existed prior to the era of the creeds and doctrines that began when the Roman Emperor Constantine decriminalized Christianity (eventually co-opting it to give Divine sanction to Empire). They are unaware that no Church Council in Church history has ever ruled that any one theory of the atonement is the “one, right, true,” and/or “correct” one. And they are unaware that the moral influence/example theory of the atonement is fully supported by verses in the Bible.  

Given that state of unaware dogmatic slumber, we progressive Christians who are unjustly rebuked and condemned by conservative Christians can take heart in recalling words attributed to Yeshua of Nazareth as he was dying on the cross – “forgive them for they know not what they do.”

I provided the following working definition of progressive Christianity in my book Kissing Fish. 

“Progressive Christianity is an approach to the Christian faith that is influenced by post-liberalism and post-modernism and:

-proclaims Jesus of Nazareth as Christ, Savior, and Lord;

-emphasizes the Way and teachings of Jesus, not merely His person;

-emphasizes God's immanence not merely God's transcendence;

-leans toward panentheism rather than supernatural theism;

-emphasizes salvation here and now instead of primarily in heaven later;

-emphasizes being saved for robust, abundant/eternal life over being saved from punishing hell;

-emphasizes the social/communal aspects of salvation instead of merely the personal;

-stresses social justice as integral to Christian discipleship;

-takes the Bible seriously but not necessarily literally, embracing a more interpretive, metaphorical understanding;

-emphasizes orthopraxy more than orthodoxy (right actions over right beliefs);

-embraces reason as well as paradox and mystery — instead of blind allegiance to rigid doctrines -and dogmas;

-embraces the insights of contemporary science;

-doesn’t consider homosexuality to be sinful;

-and does not claim that Christianity is the only valid or viable way to connect to God (is nonexclusive).” p. 63

You’ll notice the mention of panentheism above. It’s a form of theism that has a long history within the Christian faith and is fully grounded in the Bible; e.g., the apostle Paul’s describing God as the one “in Whom we live, move, and have our being.” This theological perspective recognizes that the Divine is fully immanent within all Creation as well as being fully transcendent from it. As I shared in Kissing Fish:

“Panentheism doesn’t embrace traditional Christian understandings of the “Omni” qualities attributed to God by some of the early Christian theologians who were influenced by pagan[1] Greek philosophical ideals. God isn’t understood as omnipotent (all powerful). Rather, God is viewed as very powerful – as powerful as God can be and be in authentic relationship to us. It might be said that in creating humans God relinquished some of Her power to us to allow for the possibility of real and genuine relationship.

Similarly, in the panentheistic view God isn’t understood as being omniscient (all knowing) either, at least not how that’s been traditionally understood. If God has given us free will and agency, and genuine relationship with God, then God can’t know everything in the future. In other words, God knows all that is possible for Her to know given that She’s turned over some of Her power and agency to humanity. This is still an awful lot of knowledge. It is with this knowledge of the past, the present, and the likely and probable future that God seeks to influence us through the Holy Spirit toward the most ideal and beautiful options in each and every moment.

I can’t speak for all of progressive Christianity, but I would like to introduce a new “omni” quality for God, perhaps to override the “omnis” that have been displaced or reinterpreted – “omniamo” or “omniamore”) – all loving. If there is one essential and consistent theme throughout the whole of the Bible it is God’s love. We see that God loves us unconditionally like a protective parent, like a wooing lover, and like a committed lover. God loves us incarnationally, down to earth, and relationally. God loves us like a friend. In sum, God loves us like a God worthy of humans loving Her. We also see that God calls us to love in these same ways, to love ourselves and to love others, as God loves us. Indeed, one of the shortest verses in the Bible is one of the most profound: “God is love.” (1 John 4:8).

Progressive Christianity tends to endorse this form of theism because it corresponds better with the fullness of the biblical text, the writings of the earliest Christian theologians and mystics, the insights of contemporary science, and with many people’s lived experiences of God.”

Yes, orthodoxy does matter, yet our conservative friends don’t have a monopoly on it. Moreover, I suggest that what they hold as orthodox is often an adventure in missing the point, a missing the forest for the trees that leads to the bad fruit of a false orthopraxy of being judgmental, rigid, and inquisitional, – even to the point of the sin of sodomy – being unwelcoming, inhospitable, and exploitive – which is the last thing we need in the Church.

Many progressive Christians embrace the first Creation myth found in Genesis Chapter 1:26, where it says, “And God said, let us create humans in our image,… and God created them, male and female.” The Hebrew word for God here is Elohim which conveys the plurality within the Divine - including the masculine and feminine. We also celebrate how the Divine self-references with the expansive pronouns “us” and “our.” This, coupled with Jesus’ call to embrace non-gender conforming persons (Matthew 19:12); and Paul’s reminder that “in Christ there is no male or female,” helps us embrace and celebrate the full diversity of humanity – including all sexes and genders. Good orthopraxy.

The doctrine of the Trinity is paramount to conservative Christians and some of them claim that progressive Christians reject it. That may be true for those who are unitarians, yet many progressive Christians can and do believe Jesus was Divine (in the way that you and I are), and concur that he’s the 2nd person of the Trinity. Progressive Christians honor and celebrate Jesus as a unique and fully incarnate manifestation of God. We live and move and have our being in God, so did Jesus. Many of us view the Trinity as a beloved Christian poem of who God is – ultimate reality which is in dynamic, loving relationship. This view doesn’t see the Trinity as asserting literal ontological reality, but rather as deftly worded devotional poetry. Yet poems don’t literally define things. Like all art, and theology, they point to what is beyond them. Viewed in this way, we see the Trinity reminding us that we exist in relation to others – and that we are called to love ourselves and others dynamically and lovingly. Good orthopraxy.

Taking the Bible seriously is another tenet of conservative Christian orthodoxy. And, while progressive Christians don’t consider the Bible as inerrant, infallible, or dictated by Jesus or God, we do just that. We see Jesus’ repeated instructions (and actions that demonstrate them) to love – ourselves, our neighbors (especially those in great need), and even our enemies and those teachings lead us to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and to prophetically speak truth to power and work to reduce the number of people who are hungry, naked, unhoused, or in prison. Good orthopraxy.

It’s important to realize that none of the people described as experiencing salvation in the Gospels – and in the entirety of the New Testament – subscribed to any of the “required truth claims” our conservative friends insist upon. The orthodoxy that matters is an orthodoxy of the heart – not the head. It’s being open to the inner knowing of God’s omniamo all-loving presence in our lives – and living accordingly."

~ RW

Part 261. A 'must read' Jim Palmer article. .

 I concur with all this. Article byJim PALMER.

It’s unfortunate for all those years as a pastor that I cheapened Jesus by making him into supernatural being who would save the world, and not as a courageous and revolutionary human person who came to love it. I can’t relate to the religious Jesus as a sinless saint, but I feel like I understand the Jesus who found deep peace within himself, but could also became unhinged by the abuses of religion. 

With that in mind, here are 10 things about Christianity that Jesus would not endorse if he had a say: 

1. That his vision for a transformed society, got twisted into an afterlife fantasy about heaven.

2. That a religion was formed to worship his name, instead of a movement to advance his message.

3. That the gospel says his death solved the problem of humankind's separation from God, instead of accepting that his life revealed the truth that there is no separation from God.

4. That the religion bearing his name was conceived by the theories and doctrines of Paul, instead of the truth Jesus lived and demonstrated.

5. That he was said to exclusively be God in the flesh, putting his example out of reach, rather than teaching that we all share in the same spirit that empowered his character and life.

6. That the religion that claims his name, teaches that his wisdom and teachings are the only legitimate way to know truth and God.

7. The idea that humankind stands condemned before God and deserving of Divine wrath and eternal conscious judgement, requiring the death of Jesus to fix it.

8. That people are waiting on Jesus to return to save the world and end suffering, rather than taking responsibility for saving the world and solving suffering ourselves.

9. That people think there is magical potency in uttering the name of Jesus, rather than accessing our own natural powers and capabilities to effect change.

10. That people have come to associate Jesus with church, theology, politics and power, rather than courage, justice, humanity, beauty and love.

Jim Palmer

Part 260. My theological position: a summary. Section Three

Three quotations: 

Our religion should be a sincere search for God within us, a search that will bring forth fruits of love, justice and truth.

Oscar Romeo

God is a verb that invites us to live, to love and to be.

John Shelby Spong 

I understand that the ultimate reality that the word  'God' indicates is woven into the fabric of all existence and in the ground of my being.

Jim Palmer 

God is love. The ministry of Jesus is encapsulated in the words: love God, love others. Reports of the ministry of Jesus contained in the synoptic gospels indicate the challenge Jesus engaged in against the prevailing religious, political and economic systems.  His support for the poor,  the disadvantaged, the marginalised and the discriminated against comes through loud and clear.

When reading the synoptic gospels we must consider it in the context of the times and also the motivation of the authors which is a factor in determining content.

We have to understand the concepts and principles articulated in the synoptic gospels and apply them through the lens of love to our current context. That is the challenge for progressive christianity as it seeks to give effect to love, justice and truth for all.

Part 259. My theological position: a summary. Section Two

Who or what is God? Does God exist?  Theories as to the existence and nature of God are simply just that, theories. It is all conjecture and ultimately a matter of personal faith. Hebrews 11:1 encapsulates it well:

Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.

John Shelby Spong commented on the nature of God thus:

God is not a noun, that demands to be described, God is a verb that invites us to love, to live, to be.

God is a human construct, a concept symbolising that which we cannot understand, a concept commandeered for different purposes throughout history.  To my mind, for followers of Jesus God's being and purpose is love for humanity, for freedom, inclusion, equity, for the poor, marginalised and discriminated against.

An associated matter concerns prayer.  I question the idea that God listens to and responds to prayer and the value of intercessionary prayer. I query the motives of individuals who, to justify their actions, assert they are in response to the Holy Spirit. 

We may in faith believe in the efficacy of prayer, the leading of the Holy Spirit but let us not anthropomorphise God. God is beyond description.

Part 258. My theological position: a summary. Section One.

As I have mused on theological matters in this blog some of my beliefs have developed, others have stayed as they were whilst yet others have been rejected. It is all personal opinion, though I trust I have taken counsel from others far more experienced and knowledgeable in theology than I can ever hope to be. I eschew flowery and opaque language. Jargon leaves me cold. Keep it simple but not simplistic.

So what is my theological stance?  

I let go of the notion that the Bible is a divine product. I learned that it is a human cultural product, the product of two ancient communities, biblical Israel and early Christianity. As such, it contained their understandings and affirmations, statements not coming directly or somewhat directly from God.....I realised that whatever "divine revelation" and the "inspiration  of the Bible" meant (if they meant anything, they did not mean that the Bible was a divine product with divine authority.

Marcus Borg 

The above may be read in conjunction with the following statement by Borg.

Properly understood the Bible is a potential ally to the progressive Christian passion for transformation of ourselves and the world.  It is our great heritage.  Along with Jesus, to whom it is subordinate, it is our greatest treasure.

What is properly understood? How do we understand the meaning of words? How do we develop understanding of the message words are intended to convey?  How do we interpret the bible in our context? The ideas of Jacques Derrida and other postmodernists inform us that the meaning of literature is not determined by the author but by our own understanding.  A sensible approach. How are we to know what the authors of the Bible intended? Each generation brings its own interpretation to bear on scripture. In this context I proffer this gem.

My point is not that those ancient people told literal stories and we are not smart enough to take them symbolically, but that they told them symbolically and we are now dumb enough to take them literally.

John Dominic Crossan

So, should we take the synoptic gospels stories about Jesus literally or symbolically and if the latter what do they symbolise? Perhaps that God is love expressed symbolically in human form in Jesus.

Part 257. More quotations

The Kingdom of God is not a matter of getting individuals to heaven, but of transforming the life on earth into the harmony of heaven. 

Walter Rauschenbusch 

Your 'yes' to God  requires your 'no' to all injustice, to all evil, to all lies.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer 

We cannot profess our solidarity with those who are oppressed when we are unwilling to confront the oppressor.

Henri Nouwen

How can we be the church of Jesus unless we reflect the ministry of Jesus?  Is the church a radical incarnation of the ministry of Jesus or a private social club?

Yvette Flunder

The prophetic tasks of the Church are to tell the truth in a society that lives and illusion, grieve in a society that practices denial, and express hope in a society that lives in despair.

Walter Brueggemann 

Part 256. Theology of Social Justice

A political ecclesiology organising then, begins with the Spirit's call to Christian churches to build relationships of liberation and love, and this mission is concretizing in the experience of counterpublic churches, building relational power for political, economic and racial justice.

Aaron Stauffer.  

Phew!. Fortunately Kissing Fish Book Facebook page has provided an explanation in plain English.

"Aaron Stauffer's work encapsulates a profound perspective on the role of Christian churches in societal transformation. It suggests that a political ecclesiology, or the understanding of the church's role in political engagement, commences with the Spirit's call to establish relationships rooted in liberation and love. This call extends beyond mere rhetoric, finding concrete expression in the lived experiences of counterpublic churches. 

In the context of counterpublic churches, the mission takes shape, and these faith communities become agents of change. They actively contribute to building relational power, not only within their congregations but also in the broader social landscape. The objective is clear: to address pressing issues of political, economic, and racial justice.

Stauffer invites contemplation on the dynamic interplay between spirituality and social action. He challenges traditional notions of the church as a passive  observer, urging a more active and engaged role in the pursuit of justice. The transformative journey outlined in his work beckons believers to heed the Spirit's call, actively participate in the mission of liberation and love, and contribute to the collective effort for a more just and equitable society."

I concur with Aaron Stauffer's statement but would add 'and other forms of discrimination'  after 'racial justice'.

Part 255. Theologians and commentators

On my Facebook page: John Hopkinson Theology Page I  have posted a cartoon that has the simple message that Christian faith is about loving God and loving neighbours. Simple that is until the churches and theologians came along to complicate matters.  

Of course the cartoonist has a point, but it would be wrong to be overly critical of  theologians who proffer their insights into the meaning and application of the two Great Commandments set out by Jesus in the synoptic gospels. 

My thinking and hence my faith has been influenced by a number of commentators in the fields of philosophy, politics, law, economics and theology. It is a long held view of mine that we cannot understand faith in a vacuum,  we must consider faith, particularly its application, in the context of the society in which we live. The same may be said of the study of most disciplines: law, economics, politics, sociology etc.

So, who have been major influences in my faith journey? Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Walter Brueggemann, Kenneth Galbraith, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Bernice King, Jacques Derrida, Richard Rohr, Jim Palmer, Leonardo Boff, Oscar Romero, Gustavo Gutierrez, Desmond Tutu, Martin Luther King Jnr, Don Cupitt, David Hayward, John Pavlovitz, John Robinson, Marcus Borg, Richard Holloway and Rowan Williams. 

So from all this my faith comes down to: follow the two Great Commandents,  campaign for social justice for the poor, marginalised and discriminated against, reject the notion of a metaphysical God.

Part 254. KCC budget cuts

Central goverment has put a financial squeeze on local authorities leaving the latter to receive the odium for cuts they make to achieve balanced budgets. Decisions as to where councils cut their budgets is left to local discretion. Statutory services have to be maintained and any ring-fenced resources must be applied in keeping with the purpose of the provision.

Clearly difficult and unpopular decisions have to be taken by the politicians in local government. 

In Kent closure of some Surestart centres, dismembering youth services, funding for homelessness charities and reduction in support funding for disabled people are all in the pipeline. One can have some sympathy for the dilemma facing the policians.

But where is the concerted opposition of churches to these attacks on the vulnerable in our society?  Where are campaigns by the churches, not only at local level but also at national level? Many local councils are in a similar plight to Kent.  The blame rests squarely on the shoulders of The Treasury and ministers. 

For individuals affected by cuts it may then be the case that they turn to the already overstretched voluntary sector, including churches.

Part 253. Quotations (2)

Jesus called people to follow him in a way of living.  He does not require his followers to accept a catalogue of religious beliefs or adopt a set of spiritual practices.  Rather, he offered them a new way to live their daily lives. As a result, the earliest members of the Jesus movement were known as followers of the way.

Kurt Struckmeyer

God is calling the Church to something new, but we hold things back when we do things according to tradition as opposed to partnering with God in the new way.

Doug Addison 

The Church is not memories; we are not just looking in a rear-view mirror. The Church is moving forward and needs new perspectives.

Oscar Romero 

Never be afraid to raise your voice for honesty, truth and compassion against injustice and tyranny and greed.

William Faulkner

Being human, even just a poor worker, is being made in the image of God.  That is not communism or subversion.  It is the word of God that enlightens everyone.

Oscar Romero 

Always be sure that you struggle with Christian weapons.  Never succumb to the temptation of becoming bitter. As you press on for justice, be sure you move with justice and discipline, using only the weapon of love.

Martin Luther King Jnr 

What is needed is a realisation that power without love is reckless and abusive, and that love without power is sentimental and anemic.  Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice  and justice at its best is love correcting everything that stands against love.

Martin Luther King Jnr 

Part 252.. On the cusp of change?

For those of a progressive disposition the proceedings on Saturday 2nd March at The Salvation Army Belonging and Believing  conference have gone well, if one believes the feedback accurately reflects the substance and tone of presentations and discussions.

The Territorial Leaders  have said: 

Be assured we are not talking about changing our vision of fullness of life for all with Jesus, or our mission - to share the good news, to serve others without discrimination, to nurture disciples of Jesus, to care for creation, to seek justice and Reconciliation - or our values of passion, compassion,  respect, mutual accountability, boldness and integrity,  or our calling to follow Jesus. Rather  we are talking about how we live this out together through discipleship that is radical and inclusive.

Radical and inclusive.

A question posed at the conference:

How can the UKI Territory shape discipleship that is exciting with a radical vision of belonging  committing, and serving the Kingdom of God through The Salvation Army?

That word radical again. 

The Membership Working Party will be taking on board the views expressed at the conference, together with the results of the Belonging and Believing Survey, and many other expressions of opinion. The next step will be for the Working Party  to make recommendations to Territorial leaders.  It is to be hoped that in the interests of transparency the recommendations and the reasoning behind them are placed in the public domain.

Let us hope the recommendations are radical and inclusive, not a damp squib.

Part 251. Belonging and Believing:The Big Conversation

This weekend The Salvation Army is holding a conference at Warwick University to consider inter alia the results of a survey that asked what it means to belong and believe as members or supporters of the Army and what needs to change. The event is fully subscribed.

A large section of this week's Salvationist is taken up with information concerning the event and issues raised by the survey.

What is striking in the Salvationist articles is the strength of support for LBGTQ+ inclusion. This has given great encouragement to those within the Army who have long campaigned for full inclusion.

Will the discussions at the conference reinforce the quest for full inclusion or will conservative fundamentalist evangelicals hold sway? In some ways the arguments reflect the current division within the Church of England.

The Membership Working Party will take on board the results of the survey, what is said at the conference,  as well many other representations it has received, and then draw up its recommendations to be put to the territorial leadership this summer. Will the recommendations and the reasoning behind them be in the public domain? They should be as the need for accountability and tranparency has been promoted by the General. 

TSA is an international organisation. Any move towards full inclusion in the United Kingdom and Ireland Territory will be viewed unfavourably in many Salvationists in the USA and West Africa. However doing what is right for the UK&I Territory should be implemented for that territory alone.

Part 250. Down on the estate (2)

Please read in conjunction with Part 249.

There are over 850 significant social housing estates in England in which the Church of England is being instructed by General Synod to engage by planting churches and seeking new church leaders (including ordinands). Frankly I think this in a mission impossible simply on the basis of sheer size of the task.

One can understand why the CofE wishes to engage in deprived areas. The history of the CofE is one of loss to Methodist and Salvation Army churches.  The two latter denominations are also in decline and looking to re-engage in such areas. The fear is that there will be competition rather than collaborative or partnership working.  

Successful sustainable community engagement in areas of deprivation, that includes individuals who are destitute, are notoriously difficult to achieve.  The last thing people want or need is outsider religious do-gooders preaching at them. Building successful community engagement is a very slow process. Trust is only gained over a long period. It is essential that any community group is of the community, with the community and for the community. 

In areas of multiple deprivation the church must be seen to be campaigning for change, campaigning that has to be led from within the community. Control must rest with a community group, not outsiders whether as individuals or as representatives of a church.  

Nowhere in the General Synod deliberations is there so much as a passing reference to Liberation Theology. The principles of LT are applicable to church engagement in areas of deprivation, indeed are essential.  The church, of whatever denomination, is not there only to apply bandages to the wounded but to engage with communities for them to campaign for structural change.

It is a huge undertaking the CofE is embarked on. To achieve its target will require a massive commitment of human and financial resources.  It would have been preferable to set a much lower initial target and then build on the experience gained.

Part 249. Down on the estate (1)

An excellent initiative in many respects but i have some reservations. Below is the text of a Church of England press release.

General Synod

General Synod calls for redoubling of efforts to create new churches on estates

26/02/2024

Estate churches thanked by Bishop for 'utterly beautiful' work in face of challenges including poverty and rising levels of destitution

The Church of England needs many more leaders from working class backgrounds and deprived communities, the General Synod has heard, in a debate where members voted to redouble efforts to establish churches on housing estates.

The Synod re-committed the Church of England to setting up a church on every significant social housing estate, five years on from first giving its backing to this goal.

Members also backed moves to double the number of young active Christians on housing estates and ensure that young people from estates and low-income communities are trained as children’s and young people’s leaders among other forms of ministry.

The Bishop of Blackburn, Philip North, who introduced the debate, called on the Church of England to act now to reverse the "slow erosion" of Christian life on estates.

Dioceses and Theological Education institutions (TEIs) – where people are trained for ordained ministry - should be encouraged to consider more ways of training lay and ordained leaders from estates and deprived communities, he said.

“Estates churches and the wider church desperately need leaders called from our estates and deprived communities,” he said.

He added: “I’m convinced that there is an underground army of evangelists and prophets out there which a culturally middle class church is simply missing.”

The Synod also backed a call for the Church of England to address financial inequalities between dioceses.

Bishop Philip said the wealth disparities between dioceses are a "scandal" that "we cannot allow to endure".

He told Synod members that there have been "many advances" since the General Synod gave its backing five years ago for the drive to set up a church on every significant social housing estates in the country.

New estate churches have been planted by all Anglican traditions, he said, and a number of dioceses, such as Southwark, Norwich, London and Southwell and Nottingham have appointed advisers.

He added that around £100 million of Lowest Income Communities Funding and £40 million in Strategic Development Funding has been allocated to estates or economically deprived communities.

But he said there had also been "significant" setbacks including the impact of the pandemic.

At least 10 more estates churches have closed in the past five years, most with no plan for replanting and there are still at least 850 significant estates that are not served by a Christian community, he said.

Bishop Philip said the Synod had a chance to acknowledge and thank a "remarkable" group of lay people and priests who minister on estates.

He said the work on estates churches had been "utterly beautiful" in the face of multiple challenges including the pandemic and increasing levels of poverty and destitution.

The motion

Synod members gave their unanimous backing to the following Estates Evangelism motion (364 votes for, none against and no abstentions):

This Synod:

*dedicate itself afresh to the goal of achieving a loving, serving and worshipping Christian community on every significant social housing estate to mark the fifth anniversary of Synod Motion GS2122

*commend the work of all who minister on our estates and gives thanks for those Dioceses who have responded positively to the 2019 Motion

*call on all Dioceses to include in their strategic mission and ministry plans the goal of planting and renewing churches on, and/or doubling the number of young active disciples in social housing estates/other economically marginalised communities

*call on the whole church to address as a matter of urgency the structural and financial injustices that prevent flourishing and sustainable worshipping communities on every estate (for example, the financial inequalities between dioceses and the distribution of LInC Funding)

*commit itself to taking the necessary steps to raise up and support a new generation of lay and ordained leaders from estates and working class backgrounds (by for example addressing the recommendations of the Ministry Council’s Report ‘Let Justice Roll Down.’) at all levels in the church including a commitment to invest creatively in local and grassroots forms of ministry and leadership training.

*Request the Estates Evangelism Task Group to work alongside diocesan vocations advisers, the 30,000 Project and other related bodies to ensure that priority is given to the formation of young people from estates and low-income communities to serve as children’s and young people’s leaders, as well as in other forms of Christian ministry.

End of press release. My comments will be in the next post.

Part 248. Apologies but no resignations.

In Part 243. As Ollie said to Stan mention is made of the independent report (Wilkinson Report) into the shambles that is the Church of England's safeguarding policies and procedures. It is a damning report.

 General Synod agreed that as a matter of priority the report be sent to committees to consider and make recommendations for change. Profuse apologies offered to victims of abuse and members of the then Independent Safeguarding Board. 

However no resignations from anyone with responsibility for this abject failure to protect the vulnerable. Heads should have rolled.

Part 247. The shambles continues

The paper and proposals for reconciliation of the conflict between the factions, battling for their respective arguments over same-sex love, were stopped in their tracks by the General Synod of the Church of England voting to move on to next business.  The woolly ten commitments, or ideas of possible commitments, are thus deposited in the waste bin. However, an amendment calling for a new structure to protect the dedicated sensibilities of the the fundamentalist brigade was lost. A portent for the future as the Archbishop of the presses on with his fiction of unity within the Church of England and the Anglican Communion.

So, what now?

'A legally secure structural settlement, without theological compromise, is the only way forward, says CEEC’s John Dunnett.

The meeting of the General Synod of the Church of England concluded on Tuesday.

Commenting on the debate on the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) process, Revd Canon John Dunnett, National Director, Church of England Evangelical Council, CEEC, said: “The decision taken by General Synod to move to next business [before the end of the debate] is demonstrative of widespread dissatisfaction with how the bishops have been progressing the LLF process. The one thing that Synod could largely agree on was that neither side could support the proposals that would emanate from the motion, as tabled at Synod. We believe that GS2346, as presented at Synod, is riddled with confusion and ambiguity, contains proposals we could never support, and outlines inadequate structural provision.

“Significantly, the move to next business is also evidence that we cannot ‘square the circle’ in the debate, as currently framed. This issue is not adiaphora – we cannot agree to disagree.

“This is why we continue to call for a legal and structural settlement without theological compromise, which we believe is the only way forward. We will gladly work with Bishop Martyn Snow to explore this route further. Between now and July, we will be calling on churches and their leaders to articulate their support for this.

“Many feel that the fabric of the Church of England is tearing as a result of the Living in Love and Faith process and that structural differentiation is the only way of maintaining any degree of unity."'

What will be the architecture of a legally secure structural settlement?  I believe we must wait and see what emerges before commenting.

The proponents of full inclusion also consider the disposal of the motion by General Synod helps their cause as it adds impetus and urgency to giving effect to earlier decisions by Synod relating to stand-alone services of blessing for individuals in same-sex marriages. I am not so sure. At some point there will need to be a change in Canon law that requires two-thirds majorities in all three houses of Synod. Will there be a trade-off? Agree the new structure the price for this being agreement to change Canon law?  

It looks very messy and much may depend on the composition of the General Synod after the 2025 elections. Or will Parliament intervene?

Part 246. Quotations (1)

I concur with the sentiments expressed in the following quotations.

I prefer a Church which is bruised, hurting and dirty because it has been out on the streets, rather than a Church which is unhealthy from being confined and from clinging to its own security.

Pope Francis 

We must talk about poverty, because people insulated by their own comfort lose sight of it.

Dorothy Day

If we try and have a Christianity without social justice, we cut out the beautiful beating heart of Jesus and we are left with only a lifeless corpse of religion to drag around.

John Pavlovitz

The measure of a society in found in how they treat their weakest and most helpless citizens. 

Jimmy Carter 

Any talk about God that fails to make God's liberation of the oppressed as its starting point is not Christian.

James Cone

When the Church hears the cry of the oppressed it cannot but denounce the social structures that give rise to and perpetuate the misery from which the cry arises.

Oscar Romero 

Part 245. An interesting statement.

The following is by Jim Palmer. It summarises (far better than I am able to) some key points of my current opinions.  I do not concur with all the points he makes but I have included them so as not to impair the overall context.

10 things about Christianity that Jesus would not endorse if he had a say: 

1. That his vision for a transformed society, got twisted into an afterlife fantasy about heaven.

2. That a religion was formed to worship his name, instead of a movement to advance his message.

3. That the gospel says his death solved the problem of humankind's separation from God, instead of accepting that his life revealed the truth that there is no separation from God.

4. That the religion bearing his name was conceived by the theories and doctrines of Paul, instead of the truth Jesus lived and demonstrated.

5. That he was said to exclusively be God in the flesh, putting his example out of reach, rather than teaching that we all share in the same spirit that empowered his character and life.

6. That the religion that claims his name, teaches that his wisdom and teachings are the only legitimate way to know truth and God.

7. The idea that humankind stands condemned before God and deserving of Divine wrath and eternal conscious judgement, requiring the death of Jesus to fix it.

8. That people are waiting on Jesus to return to save the world and end suffering, rather than taking responsibility for saving the world and solving suffering ourselves.

9. That people think there is magical potency in uttering the name of Jesus, rather than accessing our own natural powers and capabilities to effect change.

10. That people have come to associate Jesus with church, theology, politics and power, rather than courage, justice, humanity, beauty and love.

Jim Palmer 

Part 244. Social Justice Champions, The Salvation Army.

I have been advised that:

"SJCs are not appointed as such, nor do they hold an official position within TSA. They're supporters who have indicated an interest in campaigning on a local or national issue. Anyone can sign up."

A few months ago a corps' officer informed me I had to be approved as a SJC by the corps Council. Ah well.  

I surmise that an SJC may be assisted in the campaigning process by TSA but it would appear an individual may only act in a personal capacity, and not as a representative of TSA, when in communication with a councillor. MP etc.

I await clarification from TSA  as to the accuracy of my surmise as well as a response to my query as to how TSA may respond to a public consultation by a public body within whose area there are a number of corps. 

Kent has numerous corps within the county council's area. Many of the council's services impact on the very individuals the Army supports. The Army should be campaigning on behalf of and with those who would be affected by proposed policy and budgetary changes.

Part 243. As Ollie said to Stan...

Well here's another nice mess you've gotten me into. Yes, the Church of England is not only in a mess surrounding blessings of individuals in a same-sex marriage but also in  a fine old shambles regarding safeguarding.

A damning independent report states the safeguarding process standard falls below that expected in secular organisations and urgent action is required to remedy the mess.

The report states safeguarding processes have been used in instances that have nothing to do with protecting children and vulnerable adults. Safeguarding has been 'weaponised" as a pretext for removing people regarded as a "nuisance".

Alice in Blunderland stuff.

Part 242. what a disgrace.

The Church of England General Synod is to debate a motion on the Living in Love and Faith process.  The waters have been muddied by a letter from the motion's mover, the Bishop of Leicester, addressed to all Synod members. 

'I want to clarify the purpose of the motion we will be debating.  The papers set out a set of commitments - they are intended as an illustration of the sort of commitments that might form the basis of an agreement.'

In other words debate the outline of possible general principles rather than a detailed analysis of the words of specific proposals.

The letter continues:

'So the debate is about whether a set of commitments is a good approach, rather than whether you agree with the details of these particular commitments.'

What a continuing disgrace. Horse trading for stand-alone services for couples in same-sex marriages in return for which there will be structural change (separation) for those who dissent from the provision of said blessings.

Part 241. Snippets.

If you need the Bible to love your neighbor, you'll never truly love them.

If you need the Bible to care for people, you'll never truly care for them.

If you need the Bible to be kind, gentle, and just, you'll never be truly kind, gentle, or just.

If you need the Bible to feed the hungry, stand in solidarity with the oppressed, and resist greed, you'll never truly feed, stand for, or resist anything.

If you need the Bible to do the right thing, to live generously, and to be humble and servant minded, you'll never truly do the right things and be the right person for the right reasons.

People who need the Bible often do so because the heart is missing. Living becomes a religious act, and being becomes a religious facade. Everything is to ultimately appease a rule, ritual, or religion. It bottom lines on self-righteousness, disguised as being spiritual.

Love is only love, right is only right, and goodness is only goodness, if it is compelled from the heart. 

Grace is brave. Be brave.  

Chris Kratzer

What the hell did you expect me to do?  

You told me to love my neighbors, to model the life of Jesus. To be kind and considerate, and to stand up for the bullied.

You told me to love people, consider others as more important than myself. "Red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in His sight." We sang it together, pressing the volume pedal and leaning our hearts into the chorus.

You told me to love my enemies, to even do good to those who wish for bad things.

You told me to never "hate" anyone and to always find ways to encourage people. 

You told me it's better to give than receive, to be last instead of first. 

You told me that money doesn't bring happiness and can even lead to evil, but taking care of the needs of others brings great joy and life to the soul.

You told me that Jesus looks at what I do for the least-of-these as the true depth of my faith. 

You told me to focus on my own sin instead of trying to police it in others. You told me to be accepting and forgiving.

I payed attention.

I took every lesson.

And I did what you told me.

But now, you call me a libtard. A queer-love

You call me "woke." A backslider.

You call me a heretic. A child of the devil.

You call me a false prophet. A reprobate leading people to gates of hell.

You call me soft. A snowflake. A socialist.

What the hell did you expect me to do?

You passed out the "WWJD" bracelets.

I took it to heart. 

I thought you were serious, apparently not.

We were once friends. But now, the lines have been drawn. You hate nearly all the people I love. You stand against nearly all the things I stand for. I'm trying to see a way forward, but it's hard when I survey all the hurt, harm, and darkness that comes in the wake of your beliefs and presence.  

What the hell did you expect me to do? 

I believed it all the way. 

I'm still believing it all the way.

Which leaves me wondering, what happened to you?

Grace is brave. Be brave.

Chris Kratzer

Part 240. Whither The Salvation Army?

An article by Peter Hobbs, a former Australian officer.

The UK Salvation Army event [ Belonging and Believing conference referred to in an earlier post] is a nice idea but the system is broken and the senior leaders don’t have the courage, the will, or the experience to be able to lead an organisation in the ways of Jesus. Those in leadership are picked because they maintain the status quo, status quo leadership is making sure rules and regs are followed and the idols maintained. Therefore the people in leadership have never had to think outside the box, they may be aware of theories, have some ideas, but unless they have actually modelled the reality of disciple making in community they won’t have the will to change the system. There are also very strong voices like Sentry that are bullying leaders to remain conservative, threatening pulling funding to Headquarters if the army changes. People are literally fighting with threats of pulling finances to maintain the status quo. The army rolls over for money, and knows it will die quickly if the money is pulled. So they bow to the bullies rather than stand up for what’s right. Many of the senior leaders have a conflict avoidance strategy so they let the loud voice run the show and keep their money. Selling their soul at the same time. There is no fighting for justice, it’s all words. 

Cowards.

The Army leadership right up to Lyndon have shown they don’t have the will to change, and have made it clear they aren’t going to change. A recent fairwork commission the army spent $10,000 a day on the best barristers to effectively fight to keep the status quo on the position a Salvation Army Officer is not an employee. Therefore not protected under employee law and have no rights like an employee. Meaning they aggressively fought to be able to keep on treating officers anyway they like and keep using the fear method of behave or we will move or dismiss you as a weapon. $10,000 a day to keep this unjust system in play. They have no desire to serve suffering humanity and treat people with human dignity, not even their own, their officers or soldiers. They are in no position to change and they literally have no clue how to change. The movement William Booth started is dead and buried. 

The other problem is all those who have tried to change have left. All the amazing leaders left years ago. There are plenty of Salvationists who want change but the system simply won’t allow for it or create space for it. It’s all talk. It’s not going to change. 

The way forward is to take the example of Jesus, stay with the people of peace and pioneer a brand new movement wherever life happens. I have not looked back. It’s sad that people still have hope that The Army is going to change. It is current leadership right up to Lyndon who have enabled dysfunction and chosen to put the idols and dogma first and people last that have created the demise of this amazing organisation. 

But this is the way. This is what Jesus modelled. For his disciples to be thrust out into the mission field. So we can reach all cultures not just those who love an outdated 19th century irrelevant religious culture. 

This is the way. Death of the Army leads to resurrection of Jesus!

Additional comment from Peter.

I've been to youth forums, change conferences, and have been part of the change, pioneering brand-new Salvation Army communities for 40 years. Leaders talk and talk, then remain in an appointment for a year or two, then move on, and nothing happens. It’s spin to feed their narcissistic supply and make them look good so they can get promoted in the system. The talk always leads to nothing because the system is too inflexible to bring real reform.

My team worked with the territory to create a youth and children’s trauma-informed practice framework, working with our trained and proven family therapist from the Bellarine Community. Tens of thousands of dollars spent, then leaders change and the report is put on a shelf. The leaders that implemented the reform got disillusioned and left the army. Nothing happened with the report and over $80,000 wasted… It’s pure incompetence and blatant disregard of people and their investment in the mission. Our family therapist refused to work with the organisation after that. 

The idol of the soldier's covenant holds the army back, and they fight to keep it as it is. No leaders have the will to change or the knowledge of how to update it. When suggestions are made and implemented from officers on the ground, the senior leaders get their noses out of joint because the narcissistic supply is taken away from them. They then punish the leaders beneath them for thinking and innovating. It’s pathetic, it’s weak, and absolutely messed up. Narcissism is rife, nepotism is also rife, and there is zero accountability for senior leaders' decisions because they make decisions about officers in the secret, faceless Gestapo-style Officer Review board. Lives of officers are managed by people who don’t have good interpersonal people skills and, regretfully, are poor decision-makers, and what’s worst is they are usually their “friends” or peers. It’s just awful.

An Army of dysfunction, abuse, and self-obsession. It’s too toxic to change. I’d suggest any new cadet to get out while they can. But then there are no cadets anyway… senior leadership still doesn’t see there’s a problem… it’s embarrassing and an absolute disgrace to the name of Jesus. In fact, it’s Idolatry and taking the Lord's name in vain. I’m glad God is working to create brand-new organic expressions outside the army.

This is the way.

Part 239. Two key events.

The General Synod of the Church of England  meets at the end of February. The agenda includes an item on Safeguarding, a contentious issue as the current arrangements are not working. The Synod will be considering proposals for the next steps in the Living in Love and Faith saga. The talk is of 'reconciliation', but the proposals are a capitulation to the demands of Conservative Evangelicals and their Anglo-Catholic allies and another kick in the teeth for LBGTQ communities, unless they are rejected or significantly amended.

The first weekend in March sees The Salvation Army holding a conference entitled 'Belonging and Believing'. The results of an extensive survey of opinion within the United Kingdom & Ireland Territory will be published at the conference. A report from the conference will be presented to divisional and national leaderships for them to decide what to recommend to the top brass.  It is to be hoped the conference and report focus on how to stop and reverse the downward march in membership,  how to recruit many more officers and how to achieve full inclusion.

Part 238. Towards full inclusion?

A senior officer at the territorial headquarters posted on a Facebook page that The Salvation Army in the United Kingdom & Ireland Territory is very much influenced by the charismatic and conservative evangelical wings of the Church of England.  Given the current shenanigans in the Church of England (and also in the Anglican Communion) on inclusion issues this does not bode well for any significant change in the stance of the Army on LBGTQ+ inclusion. 

However, some are of the opinion that the following statements may be indicative of change.  

Accountability and tranparency must be at the centre of our service and our leadership. In the world in which we live, and across the Army, the issues of culture and the way we do things must surrender to God’s way for his followers, especially those he has called to lead the Army and its people.

General Lyndon Buckingham.

The question that shouts out is: how do we define God's way? A theological minefield. The General is either signalling no change from the fundamentalist evangelical approach, or it is the precursor to a significant shift to a progressive stance. Either stance will be welcomed by some within the Army.

We both feel strongly about equality, which we hope is demonstrated by our leadership style. Equality, diversity and inclusion are very important to us both.This needs to be preached and lived out.

UK & I Territorial Leaders Jenine and Paul Main 

Is this an indication that fundamental change is afoot? One would like to think so, but I have my doubts. There may be tinkering at the edges. 

The Belonging and Believing conference in early March may test the waters as to the extent of demand for change.  A poor showing by the proponents of inclusion will be seized on by its opponents as a justification for no change. In my opinion that would be a disaster, not only for LBGTQ+ individuals, but also  for the Army's long-term survival in the UK.  

Edit.  

It has been suggested that the General's statement (a stand-alone  item on his Facebook page) concerns financial administration and management of resources being operated in a unified way across the Army. I agree it is a plausible interpretation. The statement ironically is opaque.

Part 237. Campaigning: proposal to The Salvation Army

The Salvation Army's ability to campaign for social justice is limited by resource constraints. This is the case particularly in regard to campaigning below national level. Organisations responsible for social care, health, education, housing, transport do not have boundaries contiguous with corps areas. Thus campaigning for changes in the policies of a county council will need to involve a number of corps. Likewise with health trusts and housing associations. 

Given the resource limitations the Army has currently, I am proposing volunteer Social Justice Champions (or should it be social justice champions) form a virtual network to consider issues that arise which may impact on individuals in more than one corps area of influence.  To achieve this a number of matters require resolution.

* What is the status of SJCs? Are they appointed by Corps or are they simply a generic group of individuals with no specific/authorised status?

* What are the reporting and control mechanisms, both for individual SJCs and when acting collectively?

These are important points for both individuals and any network. When contacting organisations there is a need for both The Salvation Army and the organisation being contacted to understand SJCs are expressing views officially endorsed by the Army.

Clearly there is much more to be considered.

Part 236. A deal in the offing?

The papers for the next meeting of the General Synod of the Church of England are published today. One paper is entitled:  

Living in Love, Faith, and Reconciliation 

Not, I hasten to add, my underlining. It is a 20 page document and I refrain from detailed analysis. The following points and observations stand out, well for me at least.

* There is an emphasis on the need for unity and respect for differing opinions. Mostly blather.

* Ten draft commitments are outlined. I was struck in particular by the 9th commitment relating to episcopay. Having learnt from the issue of women priests it is proposed that minimal formal structural change should be explored.

* The papers states approval of new services of blessing would have difficulty in achieving a two thirds majority in each of the three houses of Synod unless part of a settlement.

* The overall impression is that, in a bid to achieve a spurious unity at any cost, the interests of LBGTQ communities are to be sold down the river. The determining factor in negotiating a settlement will be the demands of conservative evangelicals and their conservative Anglo-Catholic collaborators.

* Discussion of same-sex marriage is off the agenda until at least after the 2025 General Synod elections.

Part 235. Campaigning in Kent.

Kent is a big county with many centres of population. Local government is in the hands of Medway Council (unitary authority) and Kent County Council.  The KCC area is served also by 12 district councils.  KCC's area includes Dartford, Gravesend, Sheerness, Margate, Ramsgate, Dover, Folkestone, Ashford, Canterbury, Maidstone, Tunbridge Wells, Tonbridge and Sevenoaks. Sadly, the Salvation Army does not have a presence in all the major towns, nor in many smaller communities such as Edenbridge, Swanley, Paddock Wood and Tenterden.

A matter I have raised with TSA is how it responds to Kent County Council consultations.  How may a response be made to a consultation that includes  inputs from corps in the area? Does a process or mechanism exist to achieve this?  Should an online network be established to discuss social justice issues in the county? What is the role of Social Justice Champions? 

KCC is responsible for, inter alia, social care.  Social care affects all age groups: particularly individuals and families TSA comes in contact with and seeks to support.  KCC is currently consulting on its Adult Social Care Charging Policy. Will TSA express an opinion? We should be campaigning, writing to our KCC councillors and cabinet members, meeting them,  but we must do so with a united voice.

Part 234. Progress, I hope.

Today, I received a copy of "the relaunched and restyled" Social Justice Newsletter published by The Salvation Army for Social Justice Champions. I await further developments. 

Part 233. Archbishops attempt to keep LLF on track.....they hope.

Forced move?  This situation should never have been permitted to arise. No news on a replacement co-lead. A poisoned chalice?

Theology Advisers | The Church of England

www.churchofengland.org

The Archbishops of Canterbury and York have announced the appointment of a new interim Theology Adviser, the Revd Canon Dr Jessica Martin, currently Canon Residentiary for Learning and Outreach at Ely Cathedral, to work alongside the Revd Dr Tom Woolford. Tom and Jessica will work as Joint Interim Theology Advisers to the House of Bishops and Secretaries to Faith and Order Commission (FAOC), on secondment for a six-month period starting in March 2024. These interim roles are in place while a substantive recruitment process is underway for a permanent successor to the Revd Dr Isabelle Hamley, who leaves the NCIs at the end of February to take up the role of Principal of Ridley Hall.

The Archbishops said: “In the last week, there has been a lot of public commentary about the appointment of the Interim Theology Adviser to the House of Bishops.

"This has required care to resolve, not just for individuals involved or affected by this appointment, but for the wider LLF process.

"We are grateful to Jessica and to Tom for their willingness to work together as interim Joint Theology Advisers.

"We remain concerned about the negative tone of debate in some parts of the Church, especially on social media.

"We must all do our utmost to disagree in a manner which shows the love of Jesus Christ to every person we encounter, especially those with whom we disagree.

"We are confident that Tom and Jessica will model this in their new roles and support the bishops in our work.”

Bishop Robert Innes, Chair of FAOC, said: “The Faith and Order Commission is an important resource for the national church representing a diversity of theological opinion and learning.

"I am confident that the Commission will be well served by our two new Interim Advisers. They are fine theologians, and I am personally looking forward very much to working with them.”

Dr Jessica Martin said: “It is a great pleasure to fulfil this interim role, working alongside Dr Woolford in the service of the whole Church, and modelling a mutual charity within difference in the advice he and I offer together to support the bishops and FAOC.”

Dr Tom Woolford said: “I understand the vital importance of ensuring that trust in the LLF process is maintained and I welcome the appointment of Dr Martin as Joint Theology Advisor.

"I intend and anticipate that we will both individually, as well as together, strive to provide advice in a neutral manner, and I look forward to our working together in support of the bishops and FAOC.”

Part 232. Social Justice Champion, The Salvation Army

I have decided to have another try, following the shambles surrounding my previous attempt, at becoming a Salvation Army Social Justice Champion. I was invited to apply in a Salvation Army comment on one of my comments on their Facebook page. 

Part 231. Love and Social Justice.

I do not engage in help to individuals and also campaign for social justice because I am a Christian.

I do not engage in help to individuals and also campaign for social justice because I follow Jesus.

I do these things because I choose to.

Part 230. Labour promises ban on conversion therapy.

An article in Pink News on welcome developments. Doubtless The Christian Institute will respond with its literalist fundamentalist Evangelical nonsense stoking fear about attacks on freedom.

'PinkNews | Latest lesbian, gay, bi and trans news | LGBTQ+ news

UK

Keir Starmer promises trans-inclusive conversion therapy ban under Labour

Jan 31

 Written by Chantelle Billson

LGBTQ+ activists have praised Keir Starmer for promising to bring in a trans-inclusive conversion therapy ban if Labour wins the next general election. ⁰

Labour leader Starmer vowed to tackle “psychologically damaging abuse” by bringing in a law that would extend the proposed safety net to transgender people. 

So-called conversion therapy refers to attempts by anti-LGBTQ+ groups or individuals to forcibly change the sexuality or gender identity of an individual, which is, of course, impossible.

According to The Express, Starmer, speaking to LGBT+ Labour on Tuesday (30 January), said: “We’ll implement a full, trans-inclusive, ban on all forms of conversion therapy.”

He added: “We fully support the view that conversion therapy is psychologically damaging abuse”.

LGBT Humanists co-ordinator Nick Baldwin responded to Starmer’s latest statement on conversion therapy by telling PinkNews: “I commend Keir Starmer for his promise to safeguard the rights and wellbeing of vulnerable LGBT people. Banning conversion therapy is not only a matter of legal necessity but also a moral imperative.

“It sends a clear message that the rights and dignity, and ultimate safety, of LGBT people should be protected in law.” 

A conversion therapy ban was first promised by Theresa May half a decade ago. 

Jayne Ozanne, the founder of the Ban Conversion Therapy Coalition, said she was glad to hear of the Labour leader’s pledge, which would “cover the one group that we know are most at risk: trans people.”

She continued: “Contrary to the fear-mongering that those wanting to continue these harmful practices are stoking, no parent, teacher or religious leader will ever be stopped from having challenging conversations with those in their care.

“What will be banned, however, are practices conducted by those with a pre-determined mind set, who say that someone can never be trans or gay. The ‘war on trans’ must stop. It is putting lives at risk for political gain, and will be viewed poorly by the electorate.”

Starmer has previously been criticised for taking Labour backwards on trans rights: Last year, he scrapped the party’s commitment to self-ID for trans people, whipped Labour MPs to abstain on the Tories’ unprecedented use of a Section 35 order to block the SNP’s gender reform bill, and described a woman as an ‘adult female’.

Keir Starmer and Labour Party banners

Keir Starmer is the current leader of the Labour Party. His comments on conversion therapy come just a day after one his most senior colleagues, shadow health secretary Wes Streeting, backed the idea of housing trans patients in separate hospital wards rather than ward that correspond with their gender identity.

In parliament on Monday (29 January), Starmer promised to crackdown on all categories of hate crime, with those found guilty facing longer jail sentences.

“We’ll strengthen the law, so every category of hate crime is treated as an aggravated offence,” he vowed.

Starmer went on to promise a modernisation of the Gender Recognition Act, following Scotland voting through its reform bill, allowing trans people to gain legal recognition without the need for a medical diagnosis.

Despite the party backtracking on previous commitments to self-ID, he insisted that Labour has defended LGBTQ+ rights. 

Last August, data journalist Ell Folan claimed that, under Starmer’s leadership, the Labour Party has become increasingly out of step with its voter base on the issue of transgender rights.'