Friday, 1 June 2012

Miranda Threlfall-Holmes in her own words (again)



Watch it to understand better. There's an interesting 'silence' about 3/4 of the way through.

It may be ungracious of me to point it out, but I can't help noticing she confidently says of her 'Forward in Faith' type colleague that 'he won't leave' if the (unamended) legislation goes through - cf her own "Do we stay with this abusive institution?" response once the amendments were added on.

It also slightly amuses me that in this video Miranda Threlfall-Holmes complains that there might be 'two churches' created by the legislation, whilst I'm looking at what's going on in the chapel and thinking to myself that really is 'another church'.

No more blogging for a few days.

Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

24 comments:

  1. The impression you get of that Corpus Christi service is priest, choir and nobody else.

    Thriving chapel Miranda is running there.

    Peter O
    Canterbury

    ReplyDelete
  2. Not for me to say - but I did look at the latest cover of New Directions and get rather the same feeling!

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's an interesting thought though. Is divine service incumbent on there simply being worship to God or the substantive presence of the ekklesia (and with that the assumption that it would be better if the ekklesia was as large as possible)?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mid-week eucharist on a feast day...alb and stole even,rather than chasuble, bit of incense, decent music...seems like "sunny side of middle Anglicanism to me"

    Perry Butler Canterbury

    ReplyDelete
  5. This would be the sunny side with no-one there to hear the music. Except God of course.

    Which brings us back to my question...

    If I was really cheeky, I'd ask whether "worship" offered by those who were unregenerate was accepted by God.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Isaiah 1:10-17... no

    But that was a strange service wasn't it. It's stitching up the curtain as if Jesus never came. Not very new covenant at all. What would Cranmer and the other Marian Martyrs have made of that?

    Darren Moore
    Tranmere

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dominic Stockford1 June 2012 15:29

    "...I'd ask whether "worship" offered by those who were unregenerate was accepted by God..."

    And the answer is an emphatic "no".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Surely God must hear the cry of the unregenerate and have compasion on them? But then, that would depend on them having their name in the Lambs Book of Life.

      Delete
  8. Don't want to get into the question of the faith of the choir but this was fairly typical of my (very occasional) experience of chapel worship at my college (Hatfield across the Bailey from University) in Durham in the early 1980s and it doesn't seem to have moved on. Alongside this there was a thriving CU in each college and in the University as a whole, student led. There were also a variety of different societies for various denominations and most Christian students worshipped in the various town churches. Of the 5,000 students in Durham at that time well over 500 were active Christians. Very few of the college chaplains involved themselves with the CU. The chaplain at my college spent all his time on his doctorate, though he did graciously give me a reference for my selection conference.

    Personally my concern is the lack of debate, not about the gender of our bishops, but about the ministry of bishops needed for the church going forward.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. On the question of Choirs, it seems that choristers are generally chosen by their musical ability rather than any faith they may have. That seems to go for ministry as well some times. Forty five years ago I moved to a lodging in London and was shocked to find that all the other tenants were gay choristers from Southwark Cathedral. Par for the course at Southwark it seems. On the issue of Bishops, there would not be a gender issue if they were genuinely Born Again and truly Bible Believing. Also Christian students are not likely to want to attend a dry lifeless service unless they come from a High Church tradition.

      Delete
    2. Philip, completely unrelated to the theme of the thread, but what years in the early 80's is this and which church did you attend during your time in Durham?

      Delete
  9. This thread seems to be something of a re-run of Cartwright and Whitgift ( and later Hooker) P Ould as Cartwright?

    PB ( Canterbury)

    ps I shall be joining the unregenerate for some decent music at Evensong in the Cathedral this afternoon.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Goodness, where is the Bible in all of this?

    My wife says that she is the far more moderate face of WATCH.

    Almost reasonable in comparison to some others

    God help the Church!

    ReplyDelete
  11. The fig tree, empty "religion" looks good at the distance

    fruit?

    Do we want to wither as well?

    Phil

    ReplyDelete
  12. I thought her "abusive husband" post was rather misguided, although not in the league of Wallace Benn's comparison of the movement for women's ordination to the Nazi party!
    In this interview she conducts herself with grace and maturity - particularly in the face of colleagues who will not take communion with her and in the face of hostility and even hateful comments from some of those opposed ("unregenerate", "empty religion"...?) A woman who is an asset to the church, and whose gifts, with God's grace, will be more fully enabled as time goes on.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Colleagues who won't take communion with her"

      Think she said the member of the the choir wouldn't take communion "from" her not wouldn't take communion from her.

      Delete
    2. ...not wouldn't take communion with her!

      Delete
    3. I feel that it depends a lot on what you believe the eucharist to be. Is it just a bit of bread and wine or is it the body an blood of Christ? If it is the former, then why bother going to the church for a bit of bread and wine, we can easily buy it at the local supermarket (and have it in larger quantities, too). If it is the latter, then it is holy. I used to be a server in a CofE church and would faithfully serve, but refuse to take communion when a woman president used to preside, because according to my understand of the Bible, the wine and bread that she gives is no different to the ones I have at home. The Holy Bible and the rules laid by the founding fathers do not allow women to preside over the church or to be bishops. For people like me, as long as we have the option of knowing that our priests and bishops have been appointed in accordance to the Holy Bible (in other words, no women bishops), then we will be glad to continue to stay in the Anglican faith. But when we no longer have the right to full information about the ordination of our priests, then there is hardly any point in us going to the Anglican church and getting stones instead of bread. Should that be the case, the Anglican church can do what she thinks is the best for her (without consulting the Holy Bible), but people like me would be forced to move on to Orthodox, Catholic or pentecoastal churches.

      Delete
  13. Wallace Benn did not compare anyone to the Nazis- I was there at the meeting where he was supposed to have said this, and the report was a lie.

    Stephen Walton
    Marbury

    ReplyDelete
  14. Solomon said, 'The ways of a woman, who can understand them'? Our independent church when renewing it's structure set up a group to consider biblically whether a woman could be part of the leadership, ie; elder. Their conclusion was no, but they could be part of ministry. The fact that the best, most anointed preacher we had was a woman had to go by the bye. Her husband became the Pastor and he rarely lets his wife preach. A lot of politics here.

    My conclusion was that if a woman has the gift of God, let her preach. But when it comes to authority, scripture clearly sais the man is the head. Please correct me if I am wrong. I also know that the neck can turn the head but if the male is a stiff necked rebellious and short sighted individual, you have stale mate.

    Ultimately we must be open to the gifting of God to whomever they are given but not to ambitious self seeking individuals.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "My conclusion was that if a woman has the gift of God, let her preach. But when it comes to authority, scripture clearly says the man is the head."

    I have a real problem with this idea of a contrast between preaching and exercise of spiritual authority, as though one could do the first without wielding the second. How can that be? Preaching is conveying God's Word with precise and effective application.

    What do other readers think about this?

    Dan Baynes
    Barton Seagrave

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous; 'My conclusion' was as a result of the panels considerations. There is however a difference between anointing and submission. I must profess I sympathise with the CofE over the dilemma they confront. I am one hundred percent in favour of women in ministry but if it is causing such dissention, a Christ led woman might be inclined to say, OK, I will hold off. Maybe in time God will convict others as they feel. Time always sorts these things out and we all need to be patient.

      Delete
    2. "I am one hundred percent in favour of women in ministry but if it is causing such dissention, a Christ led woman might be inclined to say, OK, I will hold off. Maybe in time God will convict others as they feel. Time always sorts these things out and we all need to be patient."

      Exactly! Well said Integrity!

      Delete
  16. Father Simon speaks for me. I taught him Latin. He is brilliant. He has the empathy and imagination to enter into other people's perspectives. He is the quintissential Anglican. I applaud him.

    John Moles.

    ReplyDelete