What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • The Five Marks of Mission (Useful or not?)

    Following on from my diatribe about the word Missional the other week, here’s another thing.

    Are the Five Marks of Mission which are so very often discussed in Anglican circles as useful as people presume?

    Here I would have to say that I believe in them all. I think they are all lovely, vital, necessary and holy and all the rest.

    However, the question that I find myself coming back to again and again is to ask whether the Five Marks of Mission somehow end up functioning as a buffer between good church people and any discussion of effective evangelism.

    It seems to me that there might be other marks of mission. Like conversion, for example, of oneself and others. Or growth, maybe, of some kind or another.

    Just wondering.

    In case you don’t know, the Five Marks of Mission are held to be these:

    To proclaim the Good News of the Kingdom
    To teach, baptise and nurture new believers
    To respond to human need by loving service
    To seek to transform unjust structures of society
    To strive to safeguard the integrity of creation and sustain and renew the life of the earth

    My hunch is that a tiny handful of the people in my home congregation would have heard about the five marks and maybe one or two would be able to name them.

    Once again, can I state that I’m not disagreeing with any of them. It is just that, notwithstanding the usefulness of the Marks as some kind of checklist, I fear greatly the idea that people might think they are a descriptor of mission.

    It would be good to hear testimony of souls being added to the kingdom by the naming of the five marks?

    Anyone?

    Anyone want to admit to sharing my questions?

    ,

4 responses to “+Katharine Jefferts Schori – interview”

  1. ryan Avatar
    ryan

    Hurrah! Evidence, like the interview with +Gene a few years back, that you’d make a great ecclesiastical chat show host Kelvin 😉 I’d watch it!

    Reply
  2. Martin Ritchie Avatar
    Martin Ritchie

    Loved her vision of the church as holding different perspectives in tension. Hard work, but much better than settling for a monochrome church!

    Reply
  3. Revd Ross Kennedy Avatar
    Revd Ross Kennedy

    Yes – a well produced and conducted interview. But why no quesions asked that might challenge +Katharine. E. g. why does she seem so determined to turn the TEC into a monochrome (i.e. liberal) church by driving out those who hold conservative theological views? Why is she so intent ( using the full weight of secular law) to grab the church properties from those Episcopal parishes which have decided to realign with another Province? Of course, legally in the USA the church buildings do belong to the denomination. But morally? After all most of those churches have been built and maintained by the local people with not a penny being contributed by TEC. Bishop Katharine impresses me in many ways although she is at the opposite end of the theological spectrum. I just find it so sad that since she became PB the TEC has become increasingly fragmented. And just in case I am asked – I do not support the action of parishes that have decided to defect. I believe they should stay and continue to witness to their understanding of the Faith.

    Reply
    1. kelvin Avatar
      kelvin

      Well, I guess its a matter of perspective. I did kind of think that the oil spill affecting the US coast and the most devastating earthquake in recent history were kind of big stories. They also both related to the Synod that +Katharine was at. We were discussing ecological stuff quite a lot and we gave money directly to Episcopal Sisters in Haiti.

      It seems to me that the US church ownership thing is a bit of a non-story in the long run, however emotive it might be today. The SEC here and the Church of England down south would surely behave in exactly the same way to any vicar and congregation claiming they own the buildings and church fabric. Indeed, I think that in Scotland at least, it might well be the case that the charity regulations would make the Diocesan Trustees liable if they were not to press such a case.

      I’m no lawyer, I’m a priest. And I’m not as brave as you are, Ross, if you really think that the law of the land in the US (or in the UK) and moral values are not more closely linked than you seem to suggest.

      In Scotland we have no choice. Our canons acknowledge that our church will be governed in accordance with Scots Law.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Sermon – 23 May 2004

    This morning I am going to concentrate on the first reading ? a snapshot in the life of Paul, on his travels with Silas. A snatched glance at what life was like for them as they preached the Gospel far from home. They freed a slave girl from the things which imprisoned her. The freed…

  • General Synod Papers Arrive

    The pack of papers for the General Synod have arrived and I have spent a couple of hours reading them all through and trying to work out what the motions are all about. I had thought that we were going to get a light year at the synod, however there are already 54 substantive motions…

  • Europe Day

    It seems to be European day here in the Rectory. There are two Ascension day services to do (major holiday in some parts of Europe) and I also have Elspeth Attwooll MEP visiting today. She is being photographed here in Bridge of Allan sitting next to a computer and a European flag. Then she is…

  • Sack race

    There is an excellent picture of me winning a sack race o­n the church website – www.saint-saviour.org Take a look.