The Beautiful Story
From The Church of England Evangelical Council (PDF file):
“The Church of England has just released a suite of resources (called ‘Living in Love and Faith’) and launched a new dialogue around human experiences of identity, sexuality, relationships and marriage. And though we are not yet at the end of the road we have reached a big and important milestone. We are now getting close to the point where we shall finally have to make up our minds about same-sex sexual relationships in particular, and this is going to affect every parish in the land, every ministry, every incumbent, and every PCC.
One option for the future is that we simply accept that the Church has a range of views and that we must learn to live with difference. But that is a bit like saying that we don’t really need to make up our minds at all.
And provided you don’t think about it too much, it sounds attractive.
But is it possible to say and do a number of contradictory things at the same time? …
Most important of all, would it be right to lose confidence in God’s design for human flourishing at this critical moment in our nation’s history?
This brand new film ‘The Beautiful Story’ brings together a diverse range of evangelical Anglican leaders who believe the time has come to say where we stand. It is not exhaustive (e.g. there is no exploration of the experiences of transgender people) and it will not answer all the questions that people might have. However they believe it is time to speak up for what we are for rather than what we are against. They believe in another story, a better story, that has been given for our good and for human flourishing. …”
– See The Beautiful Story at the CEEC website. It’s the first of a number of planned resources.
See also these responses to the Church of England’s ‘Living in Love and Faith’:
Living in Love and Faith: Honest disagreement – Kirsten Birkett. (Church Society)
Initial thoughts on LLF – Lee Gatiss (Church Society)
“This whole Living in Love and Faith thing is huge. A 450 page book, a 5 week course, and 50 or so detailed scholarly papers online in a library, plus 30 hours of videos and podcasts. Not only that, but there is already an array of initial responses and comments from various bloggers and tweeters. So it’s hard work keeping on top of all this.
Overall, I want to say this: Ultimately, there is absolutely nothing in LLF which warrants a change in the Church’s doctrine or practice. It simply fails to present a sufficient case to justify revision, if that’s what some were hoping it would do. The clearer our feedback to the process of discernment on the back of this, the better. …”
– First impressions of the Church of England’s Living in Love and Faith are very disappointing – Prudence Dailey.
– LLF’s surrealist theology bodes ill for Evangelical Anglicans – Julian Mann.
Review: The Headship of Men and the Abuse of Women: Are They Related in Any Way?
“No one could be unconcerned about the scourge of domestic abuse in our communities, and even our churches. One victim is one too many, and the increased stress and isolation of the COVID-19 pandemic has only made the matter more pressing.
It is this sombre reality that makes Kevin Giles’ book, The Headship of Men and the Abuse of Women so disappointing. Although it is short, easy to read, and deals with an issue that should concern us all, the most commendable aspect of the book is the author and his wife’s evident concern and practical care for women victims. But as a biblical response to the problem, it falls far short. …”
– The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood has published Dr Claire Smith’s review of Kevin Giles’ new book.
That Hideous Strength: A Deeper Look at How the West was Lost — expanded edition
An expanded edition of Melvin Tinker’s That Hideous Strength: A Deeper Look at How the West was Lost is available, and comes highly recommended by David Robertson:
“There are very few books I buy multiple copies of – this is one of them. That Hideous Strength is an essential primer for any Christian in seeking to understand what is going on in society today.
The first edition was outstanding but limited because of its size. This new expanded edition overcomes those limitations, without becoming unwieldy or too heavy. This book should be on every church bookstall, and every Christian’s bookshelf. And now I have to go and buy more of the revised edition!”
It’s available locally from Reformers Bookshop.
Refusing the ‘me first’ marriage: Ten things I’ve learned in ten years of marriage
“In 2007, Dana Adam Shapiro interviewed divorced couples to discover why couples break up.
He concluded that self-centeredness was the heart of what led to marital disintegration. Each spouse’s self-centeredness asserted itself and in response the other spouse got more impatient, resentful, harsh and cold. …”
– Mike Taylor shares some really helpful gospel insights into marriage.
At GoThereFor.com. This is part 2. Part 1 was published in October.
Review of Graham Cole’s Faithful Theology
“In the spirit of teaching someone how to fish, rather than simply handing over his own catch, Graham Cole, dean of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, has blessed us with an excellent short book on theological method. …”
– Andrew Bellis at Church Society briefly reviews Graham Cole’s Faithful Theology: An Introduction.
(Photo: Graham Cole.)
Review: ‘The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self’ by Carl Trueman
“With each passing year, it can seem that cultural developments are only getting worse.
The unending creativity and output of Western debauchery is one of its hallmark industries. ‘Live Your Truth’ and ‘You Do You’ asininities ensure that critical investigation about the goals of human nature are subjugated beneath the hierarchies of nerve endings and atomized ‘rights.’ A rejection of God’s authority over creation explains one reason for our cultural plight. But cultural realities are forged by a complex milieu of ideas, personalities, and artifacts that build on one another in genealogical sequence to get us to where we are today.
Enter iconoclast Carl Trueman, who has written one of the most anticipated books of 2020. ;”
– At The Gospel Coalition, Andrew T. Walker highly recommends ‘The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self’ by Carl Trueman.
Update:
Tim Challies has also published a review:
“As I see it, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self is not only the most important book I’ve read in 2020, but also the best. I can’t recommend it too highly.”
and Justin Taylor has this – with several videos from Carl Trueman.
(Availability.)
The best Advent devotional I have read
“Last year I used the best advent devotional book I have ever read. To be fair, my reading in this category to date hasn’t been extensive. Nevertheless, I thoroughly recommend to you Christopher Ash’s Repeat the Sounding Joy.
This book is a daily advent devotional on Luke 1-2. …”
– At The Australian Church Record, Kirsten McKinlay shares something good she has found.
Landmark Family Violence study underway
“A national study is underway into family violence, with Anglicans across the country being asked to participate. This is the first national research into family violence within faith communities.
Announced last year, the research has just begun utilising NCLS Research, which has established a confidential survey site for those who have current or previous connections with Anglican churches. …”
– Story from SydneyAnglicans.net.
Redeeming Time — an App you probably need
Andy Geers and his team at Discipleship Tech (think PrayerMate) have just released a new, free, app.
“According to some estimates, internet users spent an average of 2 hours and 22 minutes per day on social networking in 2019; and in the midst of a global pandemic that figure is only likely to have increased in 2020. But in that same time, you could read the entire Gospel of Matthew or the Acts of the Apostles. Even with just two minutes you could read the whole of 2 or 3 John.
Many of us are increasingly disillusioned with how social media is draining our time and attention. This week, Discipleship Tech launched a brand new app, Redeeming Time, seeking to change that and help us reset our relationship with our phones and reconnect with God through His word.
Just tell the app how long you’ve got, and it will recommend books of the Bible that you can read in that time. You can also scroll up for longer books and it will track your partial progress through them, letting you carry on where you got to last time. At six minutes per day you could read the whole New Testament in six months.”
A church for every kombini — Japan needs Jesus
“On our days off we’ll occasionally take a drive, usually to the seaside. It’s refreshing to go through the country, but also discouraging. As we drive through village after village, there is always a shrine or temple, but rarely a church. We see beauty, vigour and tradition, but we don’t see much hope of people coming to know Jesus in these towns.
My family and I are part of a project to plant a church in Chiba City, the capital of Chiba prefecture, neighbouring Tokyo. We are patiently, diligently turning soil, preparing, hoping and praying for gospel growth. We dream of a vibrant, growing church in our city. We want to see new believers keen to share their faith, uninhibited and enabled for the task. …
We’re begging you to join us.”
– Helane and Adam Ramsay send encouragement – and a plea – from Japan. On the CMS Australia website.
Photo: CMS.
I Saw a Lamb – The Cross in Revelation
Youthworks Media has just released this series of studies by Michael Raiter – for Lent, or for any time.
For yourself or as a Christmas gift?
Dr Robert Tong on the Appellate Tribunal Opinion
Dr Robert Tong AM, Chairman of the Anglican Church League, has written this response to the Opinion given by the Appellate Tribunal of the Anglican Church of Australia.
It’s very helpful in giving us context for what is happening, and is well worth reading in full.
_________________
The Appellate Tribunal of the Anglican Church of Australia
This afternoon the Primate (Archbishop Geoff Smith), released on the General Synod website the Opinions of the Appellate Tribunal on references made by him to the Tribunal for their Opinion on the validity or otherwise of legislation made by two dioceses of the Australian Church.
The Diocese of Wangaratta passed legislation to authorise a service to bless marriages which have been conducted in accordance with the Commonwealth Marriage Act. However, there are some marriages, validly contracted under the law, which are not recognised by the church. These marriages could be blessed by use of the Wangaratta service.
The Diocese of Newcastle passed legislation in similar terms to the Wangaratta Diocese authorising the use of a blessing service. However, the Bishop did not provide his assent to the legislation within the required 30 days and, accordingly, the legislation lapsed. There is nothing to prevent the legislation being reintroduced at a subsequent synod and, if assented to by the Bishop it will form part of the law of the diocese of Newcastle. Secondly, that Newcastle Synod amended the jurisdiction of its diocesan tribunal. The amendment removed from the jurisdiction of the diocesan tribunal, power to entertain complaints about clergy who had used the blessing service.
The Appellate Tribunal is created by the General Synod Constitution. The Tribunal is the final forum in Australia for discipline appeals from a diocese. The constitution also gives the Tribunal a function to provide advisory opinions on questions referred to it. Its membership consists of three diocesan bishops and four lawyers. Thus, it is a mixed body with training and skills in law and theology. Members of General Synod elect the members of the Tribunal and once elected they remain until retirement at 70.
On these references, the Tribunal invited written submissions from interested parties and then conducted their deliberations in private. Under section 58 of the Constitution, where the Tribunal is not agreed on a question of doctrine, they can seek the opinion of the House of Bishops and the Board of Assessors. The Assessors are a panel of seven clergy elected by the General Synod. On the three questions asked, the House of Bishops provided a unanimous reply. The same questions to the Board of Assessors also resulted in a unanimous response. The theological thrust of the reports from the bishops and assessors was that the underlying theology in the blessing service was contrary to the Fundamental Declarations and Ruling Principles of the Anglican Church of Australia.
So much by way of background. The President of the Tribunal, the Hon Keith Mason AO QC was joined by the Hon Richard Refshauge, the Most Rev’d Dr Phillip Aspinall, Professor the Hon Clyde Croft AM SC and the Rt Rev’d Garry Weatherill, who formed the majority and gave one joint opinion.
There is a profound sense of disappointment in reading the lengthy majority opinion. In essence, the majority held that the meaning of ‘doctrine’ in the constitution is narrow. That is, in the constitution, doctrine is the teaching on the faith which is necessary to salvation. Thus, at paragraph 180:
In our view, the matters in the present reference do not involve issues of faith or doctrine properly so called any more than the dispute over female ordination. The contending views about “blessing” same-sex marriages are strongly held. But, with respect to some of the recent rhetoric, and the actions taken abroad by some bishops of this Church, the blessing of same-sex marriages does not [necessarily] involve denial of God or repudiation of the Creeds or rejection of the authority of Holy Scripture or apostasy on the part of bishops or synods prepared to support such measures.
Given that questions of doctrine were in play as well as answers from the House of Bishops and the Board of Assessors, it is disappointing that the majority have formulated an opinion which skirts around the theological position set out in the reports from the bishops and assessors. And it is particularly curious that the two bishops on the Tribunal (who are also members of the House of Bishops) did not provide their own ‘theological’ addendum to the majority opinion. Especially so, when the majority opinion, of which they are part, opens the door for the blessing of behaviour which the Bible clearly says will exclude people from inheriting the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:10).
The minority opinion of Ms Gillian Davidson asserts that ‘doctrine’ should be given the meaning intended by the framers of the Constitution, as a standard of our unity and our coherence as a distinctly Anglican body of believers. She accepts the theological position in the unanimous opinions of the House of Bishops and Board of Assessors, that same sex practice is contrary to the faith and practice of the Church; persistent, unrepentant sin precludes a person from God’s kingdom; and God cannot bless that which is named as sin. For my part, it is inconceivable that the leading synod members of the 1955 General Synod, some known to me, who adopted the Constitution, would in any way support the narrow interpretation of ‘doctrine’ as expressed by the majority Opinion.
On the Newcastle reference, the curtailing of the jurisdiction of the diocesan tribunal was the point at issue. The change is to preclude categories of conduct by clergy in that diocese from being the subject of a charge in the diocesan tribunal. The majority held that the amending legislation was a valid exercise of the constitutional power of the diocesan synod. Ms Davidson took the view that the synod’s power may only be exercised ‘for the order and good governance of this Church within the diocese’ and that the proposed ordinance of the synod harms good order and governance and therefore is inconsistent with the Constitution.
The Opinions on both references require considered reflection on the legal reasoning and the treatment of Scripture by Tribunal members. While that may take some time, the conclusion is clear and disturbing. A presenting question is: who can articulate ‘doctrine’ in the Anglican Church of Australia? A contest between General Synod and the Appellate Tribunal is inevitable.
What might flow from these Opinions? Anybody familiar with the long and tortured gestation of the Constitution, will recognise that the hard-won unity of the Church, as expressed in the opening sections of the Constitution is under threat. The ordination of women created a state of impaired communion putting pressure on unity. If same sex liturgical blessings become part of the life of a diocese the unity of the Anglican Church of Australia will be on paper only.
Participation in the Holy Communion is seen by many as the visible expression of unity. When some Primates, at a Primates Meeting, declined to join in Communion with Primates from provinces which did not uphold biblical sexual morality, that was the ultimate breach of unity. Could that happen at an Australian Bishops Conference or at General Synod?
At ground level, some congregations in dioceses which adopt the innovation, may want episcopal oversight from another bishop. Others may see that diocese as ripe for church planting.
Looking more widely, do these Opinions mark the line in the sand which was crossed in New Zealand, Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom?
Robert Tong
Remembrance Day 2020.
See also:
Preliminary thoughts on the Appellate Tribunal ruling – Dr. Mark Thompson, Principal of Moore Theological College, Sydney.
Preliminary thoughts on the Appellate Tribunal ruling — Dr Mark Thompson warns of devastating consequences
“It is with great sadness that I note the opinion of the Appellate Tribunal of the Anglican Church of Australia on the matter of proposed services to bless same-sex unions. Setting aside the unanimous advice of the House of Bishops and the unanimous advice of the Board of Assessors, the majority of the Tribunal has decided that there is no impediment to such services of blessing going ahead.
This opinion, if acted upon, may indeed have devastating consequences for the Anglican Church of Australia, as similar decisions have done elsewhere in the world, but it cannot change the revealed will of God. …”
– Read all of Canon Dr. Mark Thompson’s preliminary thoughts at the Moore College website.
See also:
Appellate Tribunal Issues Majority Opinion Backing Same-Sex Blessing Liturgy – David Ould, 11 November 2020.
“Attention now moves to the House of Bishops who meet tomorrow and the Standing Committee of the General Synod who begin to meet on Friday.”
Earlier:
‘Newcastle Anglicans support gay marriage’ – 27 October 2019.
Wangaratta Blessing “Delayed” – 10 September 2019.
From Father to Son — J.R.R. Tolkien on Sex
“Tolkien dearly loved his children, and he left a literary legacy in the form of letters. Many of these letters were written to his sons, and these letters represent, not only a hallmark of literary quality, but a treasure of Christian teaching on matters of manhood, marriage, and sex. Taken together, these letters constitute a priceless legacy, not only to the Tolkien boys, but to all those with whom the letters have been shared.
In 1941, Tolkien wrote a masterful letter to his son Michael, dealing with marriage and the realities of human sexuality. The letter reflects Tolkien’s Christian worldview and his deep love for his sons, and at the same time, also acknowledges the powerful dangers inherent in unbridled sexuality. …”
– Albert Mohler republishes this excerpt from his book Desire and Deceit: The Real Cost of the New Sexual Tolerance after the announcement that “Amazon intends to include sex and nudity in the upcoming “Lord of the Rings” streaming series.
See also his The Briefing for 10 November 2020. (Part 4.)
A Call to Change the Census — Phillip Jensen
At last, I was chosen to be in a sample! I always wonder about polls and samples; I know lots of people but so few of them are ever part of a sample. But this time the Australian Bureau of Statistics chose my suburb to test out the 2021 Census.
So dutifully on the 29th of October I and those in my household answered all the questions about those who were with us that night (namely ourselves). It was magnificently simple, easy to follow and all done on-line. It collected up the basic information of the community, which will help research and policy makers to understand the nature of the Australian community.
All of this except the question on religion – for whether it’s intended to or not, it will deceive by unjustifiably claiming to present information that it has not acquired. In other words; it’s a sham!
The question on religion gave multiple choice answers organised by ‘no religion’, denomination of choice and religion of choice. The top billing went to ‘no religion’ which was separated by a line before the denominations and religions were listed. The religions and denominations were listed in what seemed a random fashion, though I suspect it was a descending order of popularity from last census. So Catholic and Anglican were the top two and others like Hindus and Baptists were further down the list. With finally a box to indicate any other religion not on the random list.
At one level it can appear that it is a fair question. All the options are available plus an alternative to indicate another religion if they haven’t provided for your religion explicitly. But you don’t need a degree in research science to perceive the biases in the order of the listing. Nor do you need a degree in religious studies to see the inaccuracy of confusing denominations with religions.
Personally, I find census information very useful and I’m glad our nation in its research and policy decision making has reliable and trustworthy information about our changing population. As a person deeply involved in religion, I’m particularly interested in religious statistics, as I’m sure are other ‘religious practitioners’. The decline of the old European denominations of Christianity is important to measure, not just for the political joy of atheists, but for the real understanding of anybody interested in religion or Australia. It may disappoint people to see their community declining but accurate accounting of reality is far more important than feelings of disappointment.
However, half a story is worse than no story – especially when the half that is given comes with the authority and apparent thoroughness of the government bureau of statistics. It leads to falsehood in journalistic writing (fairly common in the area of religion), bad decisions in policy and wrong actions amongst religious communities. Everybody loses when the facts are misrepresented by sloppy collection of data.
The question of religion is not so much which denomination you belong to as to which religion: Buddhist, Christian, Hindu or Islam. To only ask about Christian denominations, ignores the possibly more important distinctions between Sunni and Shia in the Muslim community. Within Australia there is a growing number of active Christians who have no denominational connection or interest.
With 30% identifying as ‘no religion’ in 2016 it is important to clarify the meaning of the term. Some today claim they are ‘spiritual’ but not religious, others that they are agnostic or disinterested and still others are atheists. To lump them together while differentiating Christians down to denominations of less than 1% gives a very distorted view of our society and its recent developments.
A complaint without an alternative is easy to make but not particularly helpful. So, let me recommend to the Bureau the following:
1 That all options, including ‘no religion’ be presented alphabetically.
2 That the basic question be divided between
a Buddhist
b Christian
c Hindu
d Islam
e Judaism
f No religion
g Other
3 That denominations (including Islamic denominations) and no-religion alternatives (atheist, agnostic, no interest, spiritual) be made into sub-questions flowing from these main religious groupings.
It is important in Census work that the stability of the questions enable comparisons from one census to the next, especially to be able to see trends. What I am suggesting would enable those comparisons to be made. But it is more important that we are comparing realistic snapshots of society. Furthermore, when society changes, as religion in a now multicultural society inevitably has, that the questions seek out the new reality rather than archaically repeating yesterday’s concerns.
As a Christian, I am concerned for the truth. Of course, I would like to see Christianity growing in Australia. But that has to be a reality not a wish or a distorted Census report. Reality is what the Census should provide. But at the moment, if the Bureau continues with its sample census, we will not have reality but half-truths and distortions that are impossible to usefully evaluate.
– Phillip Jensen.





