Anglican Mainstream

by Dr Benjamin Wiker, Strange Notions

For the last half of the twentieth century, Antony Flew (1923-2010) was the world's most famous atheist. Long before Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Sam Harris began taking swipes at religion, Flew was the preeminent spokesman for unbelief.

by Julian Mann, The Commentator

It is surely not being a 'swivel-eyed loon' to argue that the Coronation of the next Supreme Governor of the Church of England should be faithful to its stated beliefs about the supremacy and uniqueness of the Lord Jesus Christ

he report in The Sunday Telegraph that senior Anglican leaders are wanting to involve representatives of non-Christian faiths in the Coronation of the next Monarch for the first time in British history will probably come as no surprise to most readers of The Commentator.

After all, Prince Charles, in his famous 1994 interview with Jonathan Dimbleby, expressed his preference to be defender of faith in general rather than just the Protestant Christian Faith his mother promised to defend in 1953.

But the issues raised by the involvement of non-Christian religious leaders in a future Coronation service at Westminster Abbey are significant both for the Monarchy and for the Church by law established.

The Telegraph report insists that “there is no question of a multi-faith service in which all gods are considered equal. The sacred central acts of the coronation must remain intact, and the service entirely Christian – but within that framework it should be possible to ‘recognise’ other faiths, perhaps by allowing their representatives to take part in symbolic acts, such as the lighting of candles”.

Despite these off-the-record assurances from senior Anglican clerics, it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that such representatives would be invited to, say, prayers, or give readings from their scriptures. That is already happening in services conducted by Anglican clergy.

The public perception of the national Church is that it has a very flexible set of beliefs. That perception, understandable given the unlawful conduct of some clergy, is in fact wrong.

Read here

By Gillan Scott, God & Politics in the UK

[...]  Much of modern politics has been influenced by the twin ideologies of social and economic liberalism. From the 1960s onward, the liberal left has won much of the the social and cultural argument and since the 1980s, the liberal right has been winning the political and economic argument. Both forms of liberalism champion unfettered personal choice and freedom from constraint. We can see that these beliefs have been accepted across the political spectrum by the way the main parties have been increasingly drawn towards the centre ground as they progressively embrace both of them. This liberalism has had its benefits , but there has been a cost; the financial markets through deregulation have badly overheated and a lack of self-control ultimately led to the financial crisis we are now having to deal with. Personal debt has also spiralled. Social liberalism has eroded communities and a communal sense of morality leaving many of us more concerned about our own happiness and material wealth at the expense of our relationship with others.

By Adam Sherwin, Independent

Religion should be incorporated into “reality” television shows in order to increase understanding of other faiths, the Archbishop of Canterbury has claimed.

The Most Rev Justin Welby, who was enthroned in March, warned of “dangerous” consequences if religion disappeared from television schedules. Broadcasters who force religion to the margins are helping to “cultivate ignorance”, the Archbishop said.

He praised the ITV documentary series, Strictly Kosher, which featured an internet-dating Rabbi and a flamboyant fashion boutique owner based in Manchester’s orthodox Jewish community, for “stitching” religion into everyday life.

Referring to the growth of reality TV shows from Castaway to I'm A Celebrity…Get Me Out Of Here!, he told the Radio Times: “Over the past decade, a little English word has become synonymous with broadcasting that puts ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances: ‘reality.’

“In this context, reality can often mean people putting their lives on hold, flying off to a desert island, and taking part in bewildering challenges. But there is another kind of reality broadcasting – one that I think delves far deeper into the questions of who we are, what we are, and why we are.”

Read here

by Nicholas Hellen, Sunday Times

A CHURCH of England school where 75% of pupils are Muslim is conducting its assemblies without Christian hymns and has allocated separate prayer rooms to boys and girls.

The secondary school, which does not take account of church attendance in its admission criteria, treats the Bible on a similar footing to other religious texts in its communal worship.

This weekend Paul McAteer, headmaster of Slough and Eton Church of England Business and Enterprise College, said Anglican schools still have a purpose even when the majority of their pupils are Muslim.

Christian families are such a rarity in some inner-city communities that in a number of Church of England schools every pupil is a Muslim.

McAteer said 'The Church of England describes itself as a faith for all faiths.  Parents want to send their children to a faith school."

Read here (£)

by Robin Phillips, Salvo Magazine

In our culture we hear a lot about things that are supposed to help couples have better sex, from skimpy lingerie to sex-enhancing drugs. What we don't hear a lot about is the role that religion can play in improving a couple's "sex life."

The mere suggestion that religion can improve sex will seem laughable to many. Our society has largely bought into the narrative that religion is the enemy of sexual pleasure. In the wake of the sexual revolution, many people have come to believe that someone whose sexual habits are constricted by religious values cannot at the same time experience fulfilling sexual happiness. While religious believers have often disputed these claims, only comparatively recently has science taken their side. Evidence meticulously gathered by social scientists has conclusively shown that religious people as a whole are more sexually fulfilled than any other group in Western society.

The Chicago Study

Recognizing that the findings of Alfred Kinsey in the mid-20th century were methodologically flawed, in 1992 social scientists Robert T. Michael, John H. Gagnon, and Edward O. Laumann initiated a comprehensive study into the sexual habits of Americans. They commissioned a staff of 220 interviewers, stationed at the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago. Instead of relying on unrepresentative groups of volunteers, as Kinsey had done, these researchers selected random samples. Over a period of seven months, they interviewed 3,432 respondents and asked them questions about all aspects of their sex lives.

Much of what their study uncovered was predictable, while some things came as a surprise. The greatest shock of all concerned the relationship between sexual pleasure and religious belief.

Read here

By Mark Reynolds, Daily Express

AN extraordinary handwritten letter to a nine-year-old boy reveals the tender side to the Iron Lady – and her deep religious faith.

By Julian Mann, Virtueonline

[...]  The spiritual and moral debt is even worse. I remember as a trade reporter in 1989 working for a small publishing company in Swanley, Kent, being told by the lady who ran the accounts' department that my monthly net pay cheque was going up due to the married man's tax allowance. It was not so much the financial boost that warmed the heart at the time but the sense that the institution I had just entered into was hallowed by wider society. Is there any sign that such practical political support for the institution of marriage will be resurrected under the politically-correct consensus that has gripped the governance of the UK?

Mrs Thatcher's hated Section 28 regulation, which forbid the promotion of homosexuality in schools and was later repealed under the new morality, was seen by many Conservatives at the time as an important protection against the proselytisation of children by the Jesuits of the permissive society.

The truth is that a person with Lady Thatcher's convictions would never be selected as a Conservative parliamentary candidate in the post-Blair world of politics. If they were by some mischance, then they would be rapidly de-selected by Central Office.

I did not know until I read her personal assistant's tribute in The Daily Mail that Mrs Thatcher had prayed at her hotel bedside for those bereaved by the IRA's Brighton bombing atrocity. Apparently, until her magnificent speech to the Church of Scotland in 1988, she was reluctant to give her Christian faith too high a public profile because of her support for some of the social measures introduced in the 1960s such as easier divorce and legalised abortion, which she knew were strongly opposed by many Christians.

Read here 

By Mark Fox, Conservative Home

By Bill Muehlenberg

The interfaith movement is all the rage at the moment. And as biblical Christians we should not be surprised at this. The attempt to water down the distinctiveness of the Christian faith has long been occurring, but today especially the idea that all the world religions are at one, and we should play down any differences – all in the name of tolerance and acceptance – is being pushed big time.

As just one indication of how big the interfaith movement is, along with its attempts to neuter biblical Christianity, simply google the term. When I last did, some twelve and a half million hits came back! And not surprisingly, the UN is up to its ears in all this.

It has even put together “The World Interfaith Harmony Week”. It “was first proposed at the UN General Assembly on September 23, 2010 by H.M. King Abdullah II of Jordan. Just under a month later, on October 20, 2010, it was unanimously adopted by the UN and henceforth the first week of February will be observed as a World Interfaith Harmony Week.”

Moreover, “The World Interfaith Harmony Week is based on the pioneering work of The Common Word initiative”. Ah yes, ‘A Common Word’. I have written about this before, and biblical Christians are advised to steer well clear of it:

Read here

Daily Mail Editorial

Vegan employees given the ‘right’ to refuse to sit on leather chairs . . . pagans and druids given time off work to attend sacred rituals . . . ecologists excused duties that increase CO2 emissions . . .

So much for the Government’s promise to stop the quangocrats strangling business with onerous new obligations.

What is most disturbing, though, is the way the Equality and Human Rights Commission appears to be trying to deliberately insult Christians.

The EHRC produced the new guidelines on ‘Religion or Belief in the Workplace’ in response to a court ruling that Christians should be free to wear religious symbols, such as a small cross, at work.

How depressing that, instead of focussing only on the court judgment, officialdom couldn’t resist elevating environmentalism and not eating meat to the same status as a religion that has helped to shape virtually every facet of British life.

By Paul Goodman, Telegraph

[...]  But when faith clashes with the new secularist ethos, the former tends to lose out. So it is that Catholic adoption agencies felt they had no option but to close rather than allow children to be adopted by same-sex couples, and Lillian Ladele, a Christian registrar, lost in Strasbourg over her refusal to conduct same-sex marriages.

No wonder, then, that David Cameron is relatively relaxed about criticism from those in dog collars, whether it comes in the guise of those Reformed Churches campaigning against welfare reform or George Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, complaining about same-sex marriage. These two strands of criticism combine in being reactionary, in the real sense of the word: both are reflexive protests against the way the world is changing.

Voters’ views about welfare claimants are hardening. The great wave of immigration that has broken over Britain since 1997, the largest in the county’s history, has much to do with that. Social attitudes are changing, too. On same-sex marriage, they divide between the generations. Mr Cameron’s gamble is that the Churches are often out of touch not just with opinion on the street but in the pew, too.

He isn’t always right. The bias in government childcare policy against single-earner couples risks an electoral penalty in 2015, and his backing of same-sex marriage – for which he had no manifesto mandate and for which there was no public pressure – has already cost him dear, given the scale of party resignations and defections to Ukip. And it can also be argued that the Prime Minister’s commitment to protecting Christianity’s place in the public square is shallow: appointing Sayeeda Warsi as Minister for Faith, sticking to his pledge to spend 0.7 per cent of GNP on overseas aid and sending out Christmas messages quoting St John’s Gospel doesn’t add up to a thought-through policy on faith.

But is Mr Cameron letting the Churches down, or vice-versa?

Read here

By Cass Jones, Guardian

Following criticism from church over gay marriage and welfare cuts, PM says government opposes aggressive secularisation

The prime minister has insisted the government cares about faith and is committed to its links with Christianity despite clashes with religious groups over gay marriage and welfare cuts.

At an Easter reception at Downing Street on Wednesday, David Cameron said the coalition was keen to stand up and oppose secularisation and supported Christians' right to practice their faith.

He made reference to the installation of a new pope and archbishop of Canterbury by saying it had been an "extraordinary week" for Christians and that it was important to celebrate the importance of faith institutions in Britain.

"This government does care about faith; it does care about the institutions of faith and it does want to stand up and oppose aggressive secularisation that can sometimes happen in our society," he said.

"Wherever we go we stand up for the rights of Christians to practice their faith, and that is an important part of our country."

Cameron's pledge comes at a time when the government has received criticism from the Church of England for its plan to introduce gay marriage and for imposing welfare cuts.

Read here

by Brother Ivo, Cranmer

The BBC has received over two thousand complaints following its Red Nose Day sketch featuring Rowan Atkinson mocking the new Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby as an unbelieving trendy fool.

It was apparently written by Richard Curtis, which will disappoint His Grace who thinks well of him. Mr Curtis has a fair history, with his Vicar of Dibley, of presenting observational humour within an Anglican setting which nicely balanced our oddities with our virtues. We never object to that, for recognisable resemblance, as he ought to know only too well, is a key to successful satire. The better one likes, understands and respects a subject, the better the jokes. But on Red Nose Day, the humour ran flat with a trace of nastiness about it.

There have been many prior examples of good comedy arising out of an ecclesiastical setting for, truly, ‘all human life is there’.

There was the naivety of Derek Nimmo’s All Gas and Gaiters, the kindliness of Dermot Morgan’s Father Ted, and more recently Tom Hollander’s rather more gritty Rev, each of which has managed to engage, amuse, and tease whilst always respecting the real commitment and faith of those who give their lives to preaching the gospel, however imperfectly.

Rowan Atkinson’s latest offering was a parody of itself. It was dreadfully predictable and derivative, and that ought to be the basis for complaint in itself.

Read here

The Revd Jan Ainsworth the Church of England's Chief Education Officer said: "The APPG Report provides strong evidence for our continuing concern that RE is being downgraded as part of the curriculum. We have spoken out strongly about this over the past couple of years, particularly since RE appeared to lose its status in the original development of the Ebacc. We are concerned about the provision and quality of RE in all schools.

The Report shows that initial teacher training in RE is inadequate and the provision of in-service training is drying up. We are pleased that Church of England diocesan education teams are still offering CPD which is open to all schools, but that can't make up for the lack of support across the subject as a whole. RE is about religious literacy for all, growing understanding of the importance of faith, especially in this country, built on Christian values, to the lives of individuals and communities. It is has never been more important than in today's multi-faith society. We hope the Report is a wake up call for the Department for Education."

Read here

From The Iona Institute

The children of religious couples are more likely to abandon religion if their parents divorce, but it doesn't have as big an effect as previously thought, a new US study suggests.

The study, published in the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, found that children who had two religious parents who divorced are twice as likely to become estranged from their church as adults compared to people whose parents didn't get divorced.

"When both parents are religious, the effect of divorce has a negative effect on religiosity," says Jeremy Uecker, a professor at Baylor University and the lead author of the study.

"They might think their parents' marriage was ordained by God or something and that breakup can have more of an effect on their religiousness in adulthood."

The main reason parental divorce affects religious outcomes, Uecker argues, is that children are separated from one of their parents, and parents are usually considered the primary source of religious training for children.

Read here

From Evangelical Alliance

Source:  AAC International Update

The following article by the Rev. Canon Chris Sugden first appeared in the March 5, 2013 edition of the AAC's International Update. Sign up for this free email here. 

The “Faith in Conflict” Conference in Coventry Cathedral (www.faithinconflict.com) from February 25-27 was four years in the planning. It was centred on the Community of the Cross of Nails which grew out of the destruction of Coventry Cathedral in an air raid in 1940 which razed much of Coventry to the ground. “Father forgive” has been the motto at Coventry ever since. Among staff members of the Community at Coventry have been Andrew White, now the vicar of Baghdad, Justin Welby now Archbishop of Canterbury and David Porter who has been appointed his Director of Reconciliation.

“What is meant by reconciliation?” was a key question I pressed on speakers and resource people.  The answer was “assisted conversations” so that disagreements did not escalate to be destructive. It was freely acknowledged that when issues of truth and  principle are at stake, such processes are not intended to resolve the impasse in a via media but to enable those who disagree to live in as high a degree of Christian unity as may be possible. Reconciliation may not have its full biblical and theological meaning in this usage.

In the scripture, reconciliation means reconciliation with God and by such reconciliation effected by Jesus Christ’s death and resurrection, we are reconciled to each other across the diversity of race, gender and class, which are turned into hostile divisions by sin.  Paul devotes his letters to enabling communities comprised of Christian Jews and Christian Gentiles to express the reconciliation Jesus had effected, rooted in their common confession of sin at the  cross and faith in his atoning sacrifice and life-giving resurrection.

Read here