There is a blog out there by a minister in the Scottish Episcopal Church which has picked up on my article about the latter's introduction of 'inclusive language' in relation to God.
One poster says they are, "glad to see you have a different toake [sic] to that of the Ugley Vicar" and asks, "What d’you make of his perspective?", to which the author of the blog in question, Revruth, replies, "it wasn’t Ugleyvicar’s views but an article he pinched from John Richardson."
Much as I've tried, I can't post in the comments section, but for the record we are still one and the same person.
The other comments are worth reading, though, as they back up my hunch that this is all about revising our outward language about God in ways that conform to people's inward feelings - as I said before, basically idolatry in the sense that 'I' become the arbiter of God's nature, and wind up with a God fashioned by myself (see Isaiah 44:12-20 for the same process using the hands and wood, not the mind and mental images).
The battle to come here is related to that over sexuality but is, if anything, bigger.
BTW she disagrees, but doesn't say why.
Anonymous users wishing to paste in the comments box need first to select 'preview', then close the preview box. When posting your comments please give a full name and location. Comments without this information may be deleted.