• Last Year’s Predictions – how did I do?

    Last year I made a number of predictions. Time to see how I did.

    Following recent revelations, this will be the year that former Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey finally shuts up. Expect no silly press releases on the eve of Church of England Synod. (From Carey anyway).

    We’ve heard almost nothing from Carey this last year.  Indeed, we’ve heard more about Carey’s pic being removed from King’s College London than from him directly. Prediction correct.

     The Columba Declaration recently leaked to the press will not in fact be adopted unamended by both the Church of Scotland General Assembly in May and by the Church of England General Synod in February.

    Alas, it went through unmodified. Shockwaves in Scotland. Probably the final blow to the organic unity model of ecumenical engagement in Scotland. Prediction incorrect.

    Solid vote in favour of first reading of legislation for removal of definition of marriage from the canons of the Scottish Episcopal Church opening the way towards a final vote in 2017.

    Yes – solid vote in favour at last synod. Still don’t know whether it will get through next year at the final vote but it achieved a 66% majority in all houses last year when it needed only 50%. Prediction correct

    The Anglican Communion will move back towards being a fellowship of autonomous churches following the Primates’ Conference in January. Justin Welby will do the right thing for the wrong reasons. (ie he will accept the inevitable loosening of ties that stems from the global domination fantasies of his predecessors but not speak up for LGBT friendly churches).

    This one depends entirely on the point of view of the onlooker. Welby has not spoken up for LGBT friendly churches, the communion is less united than ever but there will be another Lambeth Conference. I’m calling this a draw. Prediction correct and incorrect depending on one’s prejudices.

    The SNP will win a landslide in the Holyrood Election. There will be UKIP representation in Holyrood for the first time.

    Well, the SNP won the election with a landslide but didn’t get a majority. No UKIP representation in Holyrood. Hurrah!  Prediction largely incorrect.

    The SNP will continue to work for their preferred outcome in the European Union referendum – an overall majority in the UK in favour of staying in, a massive majority in Scotland for staying in and a majority in England for leaving the EU.

    Well, we can’t say whether this one was correct or not. I still think this would have suited the SNP more than any other result. However there’s no saying whether that’s what they were working for or not now. Inconclusive

    The Democrats will retain the White House.

    Fail! Appalling fail! Prediction incorrect.

    Jeremy Corbyn will still be Labour Party leader by the end of 2016 and become a little more popular within the Labour Party the longer he is there.  The Labour Party will still seem unelectable at the end of the year. No major defections along the way. (There’s nowhere to go).

    I think I got this one bang on. Prediction correct.

    A successful cyber terrorist attack on a major Western financial institution. (It is only a matter of time).

    Hmm, when is it cyber-terrorism and when is it just plain cyber-fraud? I’m claiming this as a hit – £2.5 million stolen from Tesco bank this year and other incidents around the world. Prediction essentially correct

    Amateur drone crash causing loss of life.

    So far as I know this one did not come to pass but there have been some frightening near misses. Prediction incorrect.

    3D printed food experiments in restaurants.

    Oh yes, that happened. Prediction correct.

    More major news outlets closing down the comments sections on their websites as open comments become unmanagable.

    Part of a continuing trend. For example, see here. Prediction correct.

     

    I make that roughly 7 correct and 5 incorrect. Ish. Out of 10.

7 responses to “Revised Commenting Policy”

  1. Darren Moore Avatar
    Darren Moore

    I try to stick to the policy, whilst commenting on it.

    Most of it pretty understandable/standard. But,
    1.using Scripture as a weapon/quoting isolated verses. To a point I agree, but surely as well as the whole has to be understood as part of the whole, the whole is made us by parts. People misuse the Bible by taking a verse out of context, but they can easily be shown up. Otherwise we can’t use the Bible at all, other than saying – read all of it – there’s something that relates to what I’m saying.

    2. How does the disclaimer square with not being able to comment on PSA? Is that a given (i.e. that it’s nonsense)? Are other opinions banned? Like Roman Catholic views. Even if (highly unlikely) it’s a minority view, are other historically minority views banned (charismatics, baptists) and non-Christians and all liberals – as there views are pretty minority.

    3. Likening gay people to murderers. Unpleasant I agree. Although if (if I may quote a verse – but not to prove a point), this a reference to the 2nd 1/2 of Romans 1, the list includes people who disobey parents and the greedy. Presumably they’re still fair game?

    Just not sure this quite stacks. It’s why people ask, “What are you afraid of?” when it comes to PSA?

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      Darren – thank you for your interest. However. the question is not whether you think this commenting policy quite stacks but whether I do.

  2. John Sandeman Avatar
    John Sandeman

    Kelvin,
    When reading about theories of the atonement, there is a real risk of continually reading things that have been said many times over – as you point out. But can I credit you with something reasonably original? “We’ve already established that like most Christian people I don’t believe in it.” I have never worked out how to determine the proportions of Christians who believe the various atonement theories. Is there some research out there?

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      Thanks John – I’m not aware of any research though I’d be interested in any there was. When I wrote that, I was thinking not simply of who believes what now but also of Christians through time. The history of these various ways of understanding the (or an) atonement is fairly well attested and it is clear that some have risen and fallen through time.

      My presumption is that most of the people in the great blocks of the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches (both now and through history) don’t believe in penal substitution – or at least, don’t believe it in the same way that a classical evangelical might believe in it as doctrine which must be personally accepted in order to lead to individual salvation. However, as you rightly point out, who believes what may not be so simple.

  3. Darren Moore Avatar
    Darren Moore

    There are a few bits of research on this, but mostly from the context of PSA
    E.g. Chapter 5 of “Pierced for our Transgressions”, by Jeffery, Ovey & Sach (IVP), which is a quite survey of theologians, east & west, a dozen of which are pre-reformation, starting with Justin Martyr.

    Henri Blocher, “Biblical Metaphors of the atonement”, in the journal of the evangelical theological society, 47 (2004), pp629-645
    “The divine substitution: The atonement in the Bible and history” by Shaw & Edwards (Day One).

    I get the your blog, your rules. Just doesn’t sound like decent is welcome.

    1. Darren Moore Avatar
      Darren Moore

      Bit of a PS,
      Robert Letham’s, “Through Western eyes”
      Looks at the differences & common ground with E-orthodoxy on lots of things, including salvation. Letham (Reformed), thinks there’s lots to get from the East re:-Trinity in worship, incarnational stuff, divination (rightly understood), but still holds that his “Reformed”

    2. Kelvin Avatar

      Well, Darren, I’ve found that there are quite a number of people who do want to meet and chat without the Atonement Thought Police stepping in to correct them all the time. In fact, though I expect you’ll be surprised to hear it, to those who don’t believe that particular doctrine, comments rather like your own can appear to be quite aggressive and verging on bullying.

      So, you may not feel welcome to behave exactly as you like here. You are not. And there’s a comminity of folk who like it that way.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Cathedral as Emergent Community

    Cathedrals are doing quite well. Now, as with all generalisations and stereotypes, this is both sometimes true and sometimes not. However, it is something that quite a lot of people are talking about. The recent Grubb Institute report had some astonishing statistics suggesting that large portions of the adult population in England had entered a…

  • Guest Post: How to Hear a Sermon by Rosemary Hannah

    In this guest post, Rosemary Hannah reflects on how to hear a sermon. Rosemary teaches in TISEC, has just written the definitive biography of the Third Marquess of Bute and is a member of the congregation at St Mary’s. ‘I always listen to the sermon, knowing the word of God will reach me through it,’…

  • 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…

  • Sermon – The Proud Young Man

    I was preaching today for the first time in about six weeks and had a lot of fun doing so. You can hear what I had to say here or read it below. There is something terribly tricky about young men who get excited about religion. I remember a number of years ago. I was…