Heaven is not our home – another shock from another Wright

Brian of the blog sunestauromai – living the crucified life has the good fortune to pastor a church at a place which in some ways must be heaven on earth: the rim of the Grand Canyon. But is it in fact the nearest he will get to heaven? I don’t mean the altitude, although from there it must be unusually easy to imagine what it would be like to fall into hell.

Brian has been reading what Bishop NT Wright has had to say about heaven, in a new Christianity Today article (from where I have taken my post title) and a slightly older interview in Time Magazine. To these Brian has written a response, with a follow-up. I am sure he is not the only Christian, not even the only pastor, to be a little confused by the way in which Wright seems to be undermining the traditional understanding of the Christian hope, that we go to heaven when we die and that is the end of it.

So I will take a break from explaining the Reverend Jeremiah Wright to explain the Right(!) Reverend NT Wright, as I understand him.

In fact I am completely with NT Wright on this issue. The understanding which he is undermining, even if according to Nick Norelli it is not in fact widespread, is not biblical teaching but a distortion of it. Bodily resurrection – of every Christian in future, as well as of Jesus on the first Easter Sunday – is central to the Christian hope as explained by the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15: Continue reading

What will Gene Robinson do in Canterbury?

Michael Daley reports that gay Bishop Gene Robinson will not be invited to this summer’s Lambeth Conference in Canterbury, has declined an invitation to be present in the conference’s “Marketplace” exhibit section, but nevertheless plans to be in Canterbury. I submitted the following comment, but it is still “awaiting moderation” after several days.

What will he do in Canterbury for two weeks? If he is there “not as an official conference participant or observer” he can hardly expect to be let into any of the conference venues. So I suppose it will be a kind of honeymoon for him and Mark after their June “wedding”. Well, Canterbury, where I was at school, is an interesting place, but there is not really enough for a fortnight’s sightseeing. If they are lucky with the weather they might enjoy the beach, and they are within easy reach of London, and of the channel ports and tunnel for day trips to France and Belgium. They could even visit EuroDisney, but Gene should take his robes off for that trip in case people mistake him for one of the cartoon characters.

I could have added that he will disappointed if he plans to stock up his theological library at the former SPCK bookshop in the city.

Of course there is another possibility, that Gene will spend his time talking to the press, who will doubtless also be swarming around outside the official conference venues waiting for snippets from any bishop. But I doubt if their interest will last for more than a day or two.

Archbishops at prayer and at play

Maggi Dawn continues her series on her discussions with the Archbishops of Canterbury and York with some observations on them at prayer – and at play. This human story shows that Rowan Williams is not just a leader and an academic, but is also a man of genuine spirituality:

Informal, made-up-on-the-spot prayers are part of their habit of life too. There was a moment when Archbishop Sentamu was about to address a large audience, but had a really sore throat. Archbishop Rowan came to find us, and immediately knelt down beside Archbishop Sentamu to pray. Not in five-syllable words or liturgical language, mind you. He just prays to Jesus, like you and me.

As for play, they don’t have much time for it, but Maggi got this reply from Sentamu to her question “What do you do to relax?”:

“I go to the gym every day,” he replied. “Every day?” I said. “When I’m in York, every day,” he replied. “It’s important. You have to look after yourself.”

There was a brief pause while he looked at me intently. He has this way of looking at you that makes you feel at once scrutinised with great honesty, and yet deeply met with God’s love.

“But what about you?” he asked. “What do you do to relax? I hope you are looking after yourself?”

Good question, Archbishop, for Maggi, for me, and for my readers.

Yes, Jesus really did rise from the dead

Ruth Gledhill asks Did Jesus really rise from the dead? Or perhaps she is simply reporting the question, as asked of Rowan Williams by a friend of Father Geoffrey Kirk (no relation). No doubt Williams’ answer would have been deep and philosophical, maybe not even comprehensible. But I prefer the answer of her commenter “A Renegade Priest”:

Yes He did; I spoke to him this morning, he’s alive and well, reigning in glory, and he sends his love, to you and to everyone.

Indeed! If we can’t give this kind of answer for ourselves, the deep and philosophical answers are never going to be convincing.

The Archbishops on blogging

Maggi Dawn, a college chaplain in Cambridge, recently met the Archbishops of Canterbury and York and had the opportunity to discuss blogging with them. Thanks to Dave Walker at the Church Times blog for the tip, and a great cartoon to go with it. Here is the part about blogging of Maggi’s conversation with Archbishops Rowan Williams and John Sentamu:

I began by asking them how much they knew about the blog-world, and what kind of effect – positive or negative – they thought blogging, facebook and similar media are having on Church life and spiritual concerns.

“They are clearly part of the whole knowledge economy”, said Archbishop Rowan. “They have encouraged people not to take in passively what’s produced – it has opened up a more interactive environment for the sharing of knowledge – a democratisation of knowledge. And clearly that is bound to affect the Church at every level.”

Is the democratisation of knowledge always a good thing, though, I asked him? Does it flatten a desirable level of expertise?

“It can certainly flatten expertise,” he replied. “But perhaps the more worrying issue is that in can in some ways encourage unreflective expression – it’s possible simply to think it, and say it, without any thought. When that happens in personal conversation, there is a humanising effect. But on the screen, it’s less human.”

Then the Archbishop of York chipped in: “On the other hand, people have found real friendships through blogs, who would never have otherwise met each other – it’s a worldwide connection, people really do “meet” you on your blog. When I cut up my collar the response online was enormous – that’s when I realised just how many boundaries can be crossed with blogs.”

He thought for a minute, and then added, “But you know, when people write without thinking, it can get very difficult; it can be offensive and troublesome. The best of what’s there on the blogs is from those who take a little time to reflect before they publish. But there is no choice about whether we engage with this new media. It’s the world we are in – the Church has to engage with it!”

Well, considering how negatively the blog world, including myself, reacted to Archbishop Rowan’s comments about sharia law, I might have expected him to have a less positive attitude. It is good that he welcomes, if with some reservations, the democratisation of knowledge, thereby distancing himself from the intellectual arrogance he has been accused of. But both Archbishops are right that there is a tendency for bloggers, including myself, to write without thinking first.

Yes, indeed the Church of England has to engage with these new media, if it is not to fade away into irrelevance, even more than arguably it already has. But, practically, in what ways will it engage? There are some great Christian initiatives in this area, but they tend to be from individuals or small groups rather than being sponsored by the Church of England in any formal way. In some ways this is the nature of these new media. But the central and diocesan authorities need to engage with them as well. And first they need to understand them, in ways that judging by the sharia law controversy they have failed to understand the more traditional media.

Maggi promises more from her chat with the Archbishops tomorrow. I will be watching out for it – although I may not have time to post more for a few days.

Rowan Williams remembers Charlie Moule

A few months ago I reported the death of Prof Charlie Moule, whom I had known when I was an undergraduate at Cambridge and he was a distinguished professor.

I thank Doug Chaplin for reminding me that Charlie’s memorial service took place recently, on Saturday 9th February in Cambridge. The preacher was Archbishop Rowan Williams. This was at the height of the recent sharia law controversy, and it was after this service that Williams was briefly heckled, but he made no mention of that subject on this occasion. (I will resist the temptation to bring in connections between that subject and this memorial service, out of respect for Moule.)

Doug has provided a link to what Williams did say at this service: a moving tribute to his former tutor. Doug provided some extracts; here I make my own partially overlapping selections from the address. Continue reading

Archbishop Rowan and the Centaur

Essex vicar Paul Trathen offers an interesting image, apparently his own photograph:

“a Lapith pinned by an aggressive Centaur”, as portrayed in a marble from the Parthenon in Athens, currently in the British Museum. This could have made a good caption competition, but Paul has already offered his interpretation of it as relating to Archbishop Rowan Williams: Continue reading

Intellectual Arrogance and the Archbishop

Ruth Gledhill writes in The Times – not in her blog but in a proper newspaper article – about Archbishop Rowan Williams:

Although he is a holy and spiritual man, danger lies in the appearance of the kind of intellectual arrogance common to many of Britain’s liberal elite. It is an arrogance that affords no credibility or respect to the popular voice. And although this arrogance, with the assumed superiority of the Oxbridge rationalist, is not shared by his staff at Lambeth Palace, it is by some of those outside Lambeth from whom he regularly seeks counsel.

Neither the Archbishop nor his staff regard his speech as mistaken. They are merely concerned that it has been misunderstood. This characterises the otherworldliness that still pervades the inner sanctums of the Church of England.

I share with Dr Williams his Oxbridge rationalist background (as does Bishop NT Wright). I studied at Clare College, Cambridge a few years before Williams became Dean and Chaplain there. Jane Paul who later became Mrs Williams was a fellow student with me, and we worshipped together at the college chapel.

At Cambridge I saw this rationalism and intellectual arrogance at work, and to some extent I shared it. But then, called by God as I believe, I left the ivory towers and my plans for PhD studies to get a job in the real world of Essex, and to join a real church. Now, after 30 years and various travels, I am back in Essex and both living and worshipping on a former council estate used for housing single parent families and people with drug problems. And quite frankly I am much happier to be away from the world of intellectual arrogance and instead in touch with and listening to, although often not agreeing with, ordinary people in the real world.

Meanwhile, press coverage (summarised here; see also this BBC analysis) remains largely hostile to Williams. But the Church of England at its General Synod seems to have largely closed ranks around him, even giving him a standing ovation. Perhaps this is because the majority share Williams’ Oxbridge rationalism and are at least tinged with his intellectual arrogance. Only a small minority at the Synod, led by long-term critic Canon Chris Sugden of Anglican Mainstream (ironically also an Oxbridge rationalist) is publicly criticising him. So it looks as if Williams will survive this crisis unless he chooses to go himself. But the cost has been immense to the credibility of the Anglican church in this country, and even more so in places like Nigeria and Pakistan.

The most worrying thing is that Dr Williams doesn’t seem to care what ordinary people think or say. As Ruth Gledhill puts it,

Dr Williams holds such populist tendencies in disdain. … The difficulty [his chief adviser] and the Archbishop’s other advisers face is that Dr Williams does not believe he is in a hole, or that if he is, it is a false hole, one dug for him by the media.

The wisest fool in Christendom

According to Jeremy Paxman on the BBC programme Newsnight last night (Friday) (click “Watch Now” on this page, but probably only until Monday), King James I was called “the wisest fool in Christendom”,

because he never said a foolish thing or did a wise one.

But Paxman suggested that Archbishop Rowan Williams has inherited this mantle.

I was privileged to meet this morning (Saturday), for the first time, one of Paxman’s guests, John Richardson, who blogs at The Ugley Vicar and Chelmsford Anglican Mainstream. We met only hours after Paxman interviewed Richardson, at the meeting where I also heard Bishop Pete Broadbent speak. Richardson drew my attention to another wonderful quote from Paxman on the programme:

How do you solve a problem like sharia?

You need to get the pronunciation right for this: rhyme with “Maria”.

The Archbishop’s comments on sharia law have apparently generated easily the biggest response the BBC has had to any story – 17,000 comments in 24 hours, the great majority critical of Williams. Continue reading