[...]Reforming the church of England « Ephesians 4:14[...]…

[...]Reforming the church of England « Ephesians 4:14[...]…

It would be easy to critique a set of EMW camp or conference sermons and to point to equally confusing non-conformist practices that are unhelpful: legalism, nationalism, constant whingeing about past glory, leadership that is exclusively one age-group and over-authoritarian leading to generational conflict, dichotomy between reformed and pentecostal, over-emotional preaching with lack of intellectual content / rigour and arid, dry intellectual other-worldly stuff both of which lack blessed brevity serving the preacher’s desire for self-publicism rather than the congregation’s needs, using revival as an excuse to separate from the world and ignore evangelism and hagiography of a select group of individuals but it might be better to encourage profound reflection on 1 Cor 1:12 and Gal 3:28.

Thanks,

Allan

Thanks for responding in such a kind if teasing way. Where to begin? Suddenly e-mail feels quite laborious. I have no idea how Bertrand Russell managed 50 thousand letters as well as all his other writing. It beggars belief! However here goes.

You are right, your answer was what I expected. Indeed 50 years ago I would have given the same answer myself. The answer is however presumptuous. There is the implication that non-evangelicals – Anglo-Catholics and Liberals and I assume you know there is a difference – either do not understand the Gospel or their faith is ‘thin’ or frivolous. (‘they need to be reformed, that is regenerated’). Now I have said before that the vast majority of Bible scholars – people who have devoted their lives to honest enquiry – are not evangelical. This is ungainsayable. The most respected Jesus scholar, Gesa Vermes, left Judaism and became a Christian but subsequently returned to Judaism! For an indication of the breadth, wealth and depth of this sort of scholarship check out Mark Goodacre’s website ntgateway.com I think you might be surprised.

You seem to think that only your understanding of the Gospel is legitimate; that there is either your interpretation or the wrong one! I agree your’s offers certainty in an uncertain world and is most appealing to those who look for authoritarian solutions. Oddly it wouldn’t take long for the reconstructionist argument to begin all over again! Who better than evangelicals and fundamentalists to fight internicene wars? Just count the number of different sorts! (‘Why charismatics are not Biblical….!’)

Much, of course, hangs on the doctrine of an inerrant Bible, a symbolic reminder that revelation is closed and complete. Non fundamentalists in contrast recognise that knowledge is incomplete and as a result commit to dialogue and openness rather than monologue. (How can we stop sermons from being boring.. You can’t!)

This brings into question the nature of truth. Evangelicals tend to deny the ambiguity of truth and instead press for uniformity to effectively govern life. Truth becomes an exclusive concept. There is no room for error. No room for alternative interpretation. No room for appropriate ambiguity

Please don’t quote Pilate at me! The only thing we can be sure about as far as he is concerned is that he was a course and venal butcher. (Tacitus, Philo and Josephus). The mild conscience-ridden person who washes his hands is I’m afraid ahistorical. The Gospel picture has more to do with the usurping of Jewish scripture, the transfer of guilt from the Romans to the Jews and the establishment of the Blood-Libel than it does with actual events. The Ethiopian Church made an attempt to canonise Pilate! St Pontious! theres athought.

Finally can I say that I am quite happy for you to worship where and how you wish. All I ask is for the same freedom! If you succeeded in regenerating, reconstituting or otherwise making my church like your church I would have to listen to those dreadful sermons! That I couldn’t do.

Try the website,
Best wishes,
Eric.

I cannot speak for Mark (I would assume he is very busy rather than being rude) but my answer to your question if it were put to me would be along these lines:

I understand the church to be the people. So if I talk about reforming the church I do not mean changing the buildings or the heirarchical structures or the liturgies. Although this will probably be a secondary effect. I am talking about reforming the people. About people being changed by the living word of God and living in obedience to the scriptures in the fullness of Christ.

I would argue that all people would have a place in this reformed denomination, including those currently inside and outside of it. But they would also need to be reformed, that is regenerate by the work of the spirit bringing faith in response to the gospel.

For those who do not wish to be reformed, or as I would put it, to submit to the gospel, then I think the blunt answer is, there is no place in the church for those who refuse to submit to the gospel of Christ.

I think that’s the answer you were expecting/looking for.

My question for you (and this is only half teasing)is, “Why does it matter to you where you worship?” It seems to me you only half believe the traditional, foundational beliefs of the Church of England, so why cling so fiercely to the structures (the least important bits)?

I realise there’s a fair bit of jargon in this, and perhaps words that have different meanings for you and I, but I think I needed to use them to be brief.

God Bless,
Michael

I’m in the middle of another referred book, one I’m not enjoying much, so I’m not going to get to any of yours any time soon.

I was meaning to get Dawkins from the Library soon and have a paddle around in his puddles. We’ll see, maybe in the new year.

But rather than recommend a book, can I suggest that you take the time it would take to read a book and instead read and reflect on Romans 10:5-13, and 1 Corinthians 15:12-20.

For these two passages and the ones like them are actually what prevent me from affirming or accepting the positions you have put forward.

God Bless, and do have a merry Christmas and a good new year.
Michael