To bring up a favorite bugaboo from the reappraisers.
200 years ago, many people did not think it was evil or wrong to own other humans as slaves.  Talking about slaves’ “rights” or the “evil of slavery” was just as nonsensacle to them as Kitty Galloway says that talking of homosexual orientation being disordered is to her children’s generation.

There are several things about the business world that bug me, but the biggest one has to be the phrase “Perception is Reality.”  That phrase is total bunk.  Reality is “reality.”  The difference between our perception and reality can be called sin.  Just because a majority of people do not believe an action is sinful does not make that action blessed - whether that action is slavery or homosexual sex.  We do not get to pick or choose our reality.  We are called to conform to Reality and God’s grace will give us the strength we need to become what He created us to be - to help us recognize “reality.”

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

These same 20-somethings themselves, if the polls are correct, are fornicating at a high rate. They were raised watching television and movies that promotes fornication.  They were taught self-affirmation that pretty much gives them a pass to do whatever they want and still think of themselves as “good”.  And they have been taught that the homosexual condition is a normal human condition, equivalent to race, rather than a disorder. Of course they think homosexual fornication is ok. What else would they think? 

But here’s the money quote,

For them, discrimination against people on the ground of their sexual orientation has the same character as racial discrimination – that is, it is not only immoral but criminal.

Make no mistake about this: it’s all “pluralism” until these people gain power, then dissent will be crushed.

When the church’s values and beliefs mimic those of the wider society, the church is irrelevant.

The demise of the church of England is due to institutional homophobia? The CoE now has less members attending on a given week then the muslims who constitute a tiny minority (3% of the population, I think). What Christian church is growing the fastest in England, the evangelicals. Roman Catholics now outnumber Anglicans Why? Because they offer salt and light, and have not sacrificed themselves to worldly values. What is a church that says, “Right is what you feel in your heart, have a nice day.” Christianity was built on the blood of Christ and then the blood of the martyrs. Who is going to dedicate let alone sacrifice their life for trite, hackneyed phrases? Homophobia the problem with the CoE? Doesn’t seem to be holding back the Catholics, evangelicals and muslims. “Logic. Don’t they teach logic in schools these days.”

what a great article.  in the midst of the hatred & violence that is perpetrated globally against fellow creatures of God, what a brave step for the Church to stand with GLBT folks.  20-somethings do indeed have clear positive values about the wrong of cruelty, violence, faithlessness, abuse of power, mercilessness, pride - thanks be to God for their witness.

As the first woman to be elected leader of the Iona Community, Kathy Galloway’s work enriches men and women from different walks of life and different traditions in the Christian church that are committed to seeking new ways of living the gospel of Jesus in today’s world.

#4 robroy

You are comparing one Christian denomination with all Muslim denominations.

All the studies I have seen show that Church growth and attendance in the UK is strongly powered by immigrant communities.  The fastest growing CofE congregations are those being boosted by immigrants.  The growth in RC congregations is ethnically driven, as RC’s from the EU come in for economic reasons.

The question of how you stabilise and reverse the decline of religious practice (whether Christian or Muslim, whether CofE or RC or Methodist or whatever) amongst people born and bred into an English liberal secular culture is the really challenging one.  You think that conservative evangelicalism is the answer.  The evidence is that conservative evangelicalism is less effective in bringing in new members (as opposed to gathering together existing conservatives into a self-affirming huddle) than other forms of churchmanship, including open evangelicalism (such as that put forward by the Alpha course, which emphasises points of agreement, not divisive issues like homosexuality).  In fact, conservative evangelicalism puts the general public off (the 95% whom the Principal of Wycliffe Hall has said are going to hell, because they do not go to church).

However, time will tell.  The most effective methods of evangelism will necessarily thrive, and ineffective methods will fail, and the balance of the church will alter accordingly.  It is likely, based on historical experience in the CofE, that there will not be one model of churchmanship, but several, producing a “broad church” which embraces the maximum number of people who are willing to follow Jesus and hear the Gospel and to do their best to follow it in their lives, in their worship, and in their relations with each other.

You say “Who is going to dedicate let alone sacrifice their life for trite, hackneyed phrases?”  I hope you do not direct your scorn towards the Iona Community, since its members live under a Rule, which includes daily prayer and reading the Bible, mutual accountability for use of time and money, and regular meeting together in community, which is based on the remote island where St Columba founded a monastery in 563AD.

I’m with #5 and 6. That’s my experience also.

The church, for many years, reflected society’s biases.  If you defended the social order then, you were defending all that ws good about order.  If you critiqued it, you were being disobedient. 

Philip, your comment is very confusing.  Scripture is fairly clear that the sun revolves around the earth.  It’s view of the uses of blood is questionable (at best).  Its reality is not our reality.  And this is good.  W have some benefits that would have been unknowable 2000 years ago.  Your perception that people thought then as we do now requires some better empirical defense on your part - and that their perceptions are automatically true. 

What God’s grace has done - in history - is reveal the shortcomings of tradition - as Jesus demonstrated in his own day.  The spirit didn’t suddenly disappear when He was resurrected.  It continued to reveal truth.  If anything, this is a conflict between the undeniable working of grace to rveal the identities of faithful gay persons, and the tradition, which prefers the convenience of the closet - an untenabl position in this day and age.  If scripture is useful, rather than perfectionistic (as the Arians and Buddhists would seem to demand), then faith should be able to be practiced reasonably.  As Paul said, “it is better to marry than to burn.”  What Philip you are called to be is celibate.  If you are a sinner, then find someone who diminishes your burning.  But do not judge how the rest of us seek to serve God in His Fullness because of your incorrect perception of reality.

Whoa, the rainbows are out today!  Are we on a mission to re-engineer reality to look like 2007 Western Society?  Is there ANYthing less real than that?
Agreed upon Core Christian Reality is pretty straightforward, if you chose to belive it.  If not, please don’t call yourself Christian.  The faith received is well defined, if not shaggy around the edges.  I think the keys are here:
1.  A group of Jewish Historical writings that point to the arrival of a Messiah, the Christ (Old Testament).
2. A group of newer Jewish Historical writings that confirm the arrival of said Messiah and elaborate upon His message and place in the Universe as Man and God, Spirit and Flesh, the Sacrifice and the Way to Salvation.
3. This Messiah’s actions, all of which revolved around demonstrating his authority over nature, spirit, and man.
4.  This same Messiah’s sayings, which explained in some detail how we could not longer get by “going through the motions” of following the law, but that we had to love Him first and then the Law would come easy for us. (notice, he NEVER said change the Law, only change your heart first).
5.  His march to His own slaughter, without complaint.
6.  His resurrection and sacrifice for our sins.
7.  His appointment of Peter and the remaining disciples as His scions of faith to build the church upon.

Now, if you cannot agree with these Christian Realities, then I would suggest you figure out what you are, but Historically the term “Christian” would not be open to you. 
That is reality, from where I sit.
KTF!....mrb

Sorry, I just realized in #9 how disrespectful my first line sounded.  I would like to amend the first sentence to this:

“I am of the opinion that 2007 Western Civilization will not be remembered 100 years from now as the pinnacle of anything, except perhaps narcissism (sp?)”

thanks!...mrb

I realized years ago, after reading some of the books and material that originated from there, that the Iona Community was nothing like I expected it would be.  Already in 1991 they were getting into “one world” religion, a social justice gospel, and other rather unorthodox beliefs and practices.  I know something of their founding and history back in the 1930s, so I shouldn’t be totally surprised, but I also have read what is available on the life of St. Columba and . . . I think he’d be on his knees petitioning the Holy One for their souls.

Of course the homosexual agenda is to normalize homosexual sexuality.  And explain away God’s word because it gets in the way of what they want to do.

See the remark, “They have considerable respect for marriage….” The implication is that they believe in marriage as an important institution. The evidence is that they scarcely believe in it at all. See the Pew Poll,  - and all the polls. Then see who is getting pregnant and whether they are married or not. The article above simply doesn’t square with the present reality.

What is more important is how intolerant these liberal children of liberals become when they are challenged, for one of the things I learned whilst teaching this generation is that they are wholly unable to deal with criticism. You make take this most literally. And they will remain so, because the culture that hires them has made a fetish out of praise (Was there not a blog here on this very subject, or did I see it elsewhere?) This generation is scarcely connected to the real world because of , what shall I call it, electronic interference, and their self-centeredness, their hypersensitvity to criticism, their unquestioning belief in their own specialness,
will produce precisely what #20 has said, a level of tyranny we have never seen before, but it will be the tyranny of Brave New World, technological,all-embracing,and self-centered, a world of Alphas whose privileged positions will require nothing of them but their committment to the New Society, a world divorced from the natural world. Alas for the Savages that remain then.

The truth is, I read this article and my blood ran cold, for the writer genuinely believes every word she has said. Larry

John Wilkins - I don’t understand the non-sequitor of a heliocentric solar system verses one centered on the earth or the differences between what scripture says about consuming blood vs what we do with blood in our society today.  The statement still stands - our perception does not make reality and many actions in our society are immoral even if they are approved by society (see slavery and no fault divorce or access to pornography or greed or envy as prime examples).  Just because a majority of people believes something, does not mean that what they believe is true.  Beware of giving society the ultimate rule of what is moral.  By that measure, the Jim Crows laws were moral as are the laws that allow for the killing of homosexuals in Muslim countries. 

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

I read the article twice - and I couldn’t work out whether these twenty-something children and friends ever darken a church door. I rather think not, but what do the rest of you think?

... heavy sigh ...

This is the battle line but not a battle against people but against powers and principalities.  Somehow it feels to me that we are all failing at this point; both the re asserters and the re appraisers.  We all claim to be inspired by the Holy Spirit and it seems that the more we raise our voices the less the world cares what we have to say.

I am very much a re asserter in the vocabulary of this blog but if people outside the church do not hear The message of love and see it in action then we are failing badly.

Bob, Badman and John (#5, #6, #7) what do you believe the Gospel is?  If we there are “new ways of living the Gospel” what aspects provide the essential continuity with the Gospel as Jesus preached and demonstrated it?  What ways of living need to be changed?

Mike (#9) I realize your list is only a summary but what you chose to include and leave out makes me uncomfortable.  Do you really believe that the primary purpose of Jesus ministry was to demonstrate his authority (point 3)??  What about the sermon on the mount?  The parables?  Washing the disciples feet?  etc.

In your 4th point you write “... and then the Law would come easy for us.”  Please reference a specific verse.  How do you interpret Romans 7:13-28 and 1st John 1:8-10?

You are on to something, MargaretG. Back when I was kid, it was “relevance”, and kids left in droves. Bishop Spong has written much on how his theological innovations are supposed to save the church, but we’ve seen how that worked out when he was a diocesan and continues eviscerating the Episcopal Church today.  Full acceptance of “our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters” is supposed to save the church now, but the rate of decline is the same, or perhaps increasing.

If I were revising an historic religion and the results were it’s collapse, I would probably emphasize the fact that prophetic stances often repel more than attract, or at least before they attract.

Fortunately, in my church this morning this was the scripture passage our pastor preached from:

  3But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people. 4Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving. 5For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person—such a man is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.[a] 6Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God’s wrath comes on those who are disobedient. 7Therefore do not be partners with them.

8For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light 9(for the fruit of the light consists in all goodness, righteousness and truth) 10and find out what pleases the Lord. 11Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them. 12For it is shameful even to mention what the disobedient do in secret. 13But everything exposed by the light becomes visible, 14for it is light that makes everything visible. This is why it is said:
  “Wake up, O sleeper,
    rise from the dead,
  and Christ will shine on you.”

(From Ephesians 5)

You can probably guess I don’t go to an Episcopal church any longer.  And our church is growing and packed every Sunday, especially with young families and a congregation predominantly in its 20s, 30s and 40s.

#16 John A: thanks for your comments.  I find them lucid and your questions very valid.  To wit:

1. As to Jesus demonstrating His authority:  He had to establish who He was, give hard evidence for the hard hearted, as it were, convince those willing to listen that He was the Son of God, else His efforts would have come to naught.  If we give in to the idea that His primary mission was to teach us a new way to live, no Son of the Living God would have been required, we could have settled for a Ghandi or a Buddah.  IN NO WAY do I mean to minimize His teachings or lessons to us, nor His new and revolutionary way of understanding the Law (Love me, and obeying the law follows naturally), my point in putting the teaching after His establishing His authority speaks to the fact that without #3, we wouldn’t still be talking about #4.  That process of establishing who He was goes right on through the Resurrection, but is Action-based first, Word-based 2nd.
As far as my wording in #4, in re-reading I realize it doesn’t exactly convey what I meant to say, it’s a bit trite for the concept.  In my ineptness, what I was trying to get across was the simple idea that no one within them has the ability to follow the law without loving God/Jesus first.  That doesn’t mean it’s necessary easy to follow once you love the Lord, just that it has to come in that order: First love and obedience, then the Law will be less of a burden, at some point, I believe (although I personally haven’t hit this point yet) cease to be a burden.  Think about Jesus saying “No one comes to the Father except through me.” 
What a shock this must have been to the Jewish establishment.  Everybody knew righteousness lay in following the Law, God’s Law, and Jesus put himself as God himself between the faithful and their salvation and righteousness.

If you are going to lie, lie big. Radical inclusion is going to save the church? Any evidence of that (preposterous) statement whatsoever? How about looking at the diocese of New Hampshire, here in the states…tanking. Diocese of Los Angeles…tanking. Diocese of Washington…tanking. Oh, but they are so much more intimate.

You’ve got to love this statement: “You are comparing one Christian denomination with all Muslim denominations [all two of them].” The state church can’t turn out more than a 3% minority??? Pathetic. He writes also, “Time will tell.” No, time has told, past tense. Your experiment in radical inclusion has the church in a moribund state. The institutionally homophobic (how I detest that ridiculous word) Catholics, evangelicals and muslims are kicking the CoE’s derriere. So let us insanely continue down this road and proclaim how radical inclusion will save the church. Kind of like the surgeon who says, “Mrs. Smith, the surgery went splendidly, but unfortunately, your husband died.”

bob carlton said:
“20-somethings do indeed have clear positive values about the wrong of cruelty, violence, faithlessness, abuse of power, mercilessness, pride - thanks be to God for their witness.”

I’m a twenty-something who embraces those values Bob, but I suspect that they mean something very different to me than they do to you. I believe in the Truth of Scripture and the faithful witness of the Holy Spirit in the Church on all matters, including human sexuality. Maybe I’m in the minority and I’ll end up raising kids in a society where I’m persecuted for holding the beliefs Christians have held for 2000 years. So Bob, please cease from your prejudicial generalizations about twenty-somethings who think “gay is okay” and fornication is alright too. I don’t think those things and most of my friends (also in their twenties) don’t think that way either. And by the way I’m from Western Washington state - not exactly a bastion of conservatism.

MattJP, I pray that you never get persecuted for holding the beliefs Christians have held for 2000 years.

My POV on 20-somethings is in no way detrimental, injurious or prejudicial - trust me, Matt, it’s based on the hope I gain from working with them every day.

RE: “I’m a twenty-something who embraces those values Bob, but I suspect that they mean something very different to me than they do to you.”

Yes they do, MattJP!!! 

RE: “I believe in the Truth of Scripture and the faithful witness of the Holy Spirit in the Church on all matters, including human sexuality. . . . So Bob, please cease from your prejudicial generalizations about twenty-somethings who think “gay is okay” and fornication is alright too. I don’t think those things and most of my friends (also in their twenties) don’t think that way either.”

Thanks MattJP!!!!  There are plenty of 20-somethings that believe as you do . . . though progressives certainly may not wish to believe so.