4 responses to “tae see oorsels as ithers see us”

  1. Rev Ruth Avatar

    My children just don’t understand it. Nor do they understand why I stay.

  2. kelvin Avatar

    I suspect that the children of very many Christians in the UK these days don’t understand and don’t stay. We can see that laid out for us in page after page of diocesan and provincial statistics.

    And still we are expected to cheer on Archbishops who propose amendements which would institutionalise treating women as having less authority than men and also Bishops who tell us that banning gay people from leadership roles is good.

    In both these cases we are supposed to believe that these actions keep the church together. Meanwhile the children leave bewildered.

    Hear what the Spirit says to the children.

  3. Tim Avatar

    What surprises me is that it’s the same term “evangelical” that went from connoting “student-ish” in the 90s to “happy” (reserving outright clappy for those of charismatic designation) to “evangelicals come in Open form too!” now to “traditionalist” in matters of Backwards Beyond Belief(TM).

    Now I’m used to the arguments being “our tradition, restated more-so and louder” versus “put the Bible in context” – at least one party talking theologically.
    For a fresh thought, is the CoE (in particular, but also the AC in general) a bit preoccupied with not losing any *one* bum-on-its-3-legged-seat? There is a tension in the dynamic that could be resolved well by a large-scale rotation in membership – redefine the denominational lines by issues not history – that leads to a slimy weasely position of “I sort of want to go but don’t have the honesty to get on with it so I’ll sit around being a thorn in the canonical flesh and blame the church for trying to push me out”.

    Social evolution is too slow; that is where injustice lies.

  4. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    I often ask me why I stay, and I’m in my late fifties. In the end, it is because I feel cheated without other people to worship with, and, well, to be a kind of thorn in the canonical flesh for the conservatives!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Synod Blogging-1

    Synod begins with a splendid Eucharist in St Mary’s cathedral. We know not the hymns. Then, back to Palmerston Place church for the welcoming of delegates who don’t have enough meetings to go to of their own. We then appoint prolocutors even though we don’t ever use them. The prolocutors are the people who will…

  • Synod Blogging -2 The accounts.

    The accounts are carried without question. One of the things which I don’t really understand is that we are supposed to be in a time of increasing finances due to the Year of Stewardship which we are all engaged with. Yet, budgets do not seem to reflect this. Perhaps I misunderstand something. Looks like quota…

  • Synod Blogging 3

    The motion is presented which will enlarge the Standing Committee. Mary Moffett asks how the House of Laity can nominate someone when they never meet. She is told that the some applies to the clergy. The motion is passed with only one person voting against. No proposal is being brought to change the composition of…

  • Upcoming Synod etc

    Tomorrow the General Synod begins. The thick books of synod papers arrived a couple of weeks ago, and I’ve been dipping into them since then. There is not much that appears  to be terribly contentious, in my view. However, the consequence of bland motions and nothing for people to get their teeth into is that…