"Like a roaring lion or a charging bear is a wicked ruler over a poor people" (Proverbs 28:15 NRSV)
At the bottom of this post, a few more remarks re the CofE situation may be found.
Trump. What are we going to do about this man (ditto Putin, Xi, etc)? Trump's weakness as a leader (already known from his first Presidency, 2016-2020) is poverty of wisdom. This has already been displayed in his proposals for key offices of state. One has already fallen on his sword, Matt Gaetz. Another is very alarming not only for the health of the USA but also the world: Robert F. Kennedy Jnr seems ideal if you are against vaccinations and if you are for vaccinations then ... well, let me not say words unbecoming to such a fine blog as this one!
Something I have been pondering about what I consider to be the utter madness of Trump being re-elected to be President of the USA is what light the Bible might shed on this moment in US and global history.
I have been drawn - somewhat expectedly - to the Book of Revelation in my pondering.
To be clear, I do not see Trump specifically identifiable as a figure within that book (e.g.) the beast or the dragon. Nor do I see the USA as identifiable with, say, Babylon - though the USA has features (and has had them for a long time) in respect of trade which resonate with the fallen city of later chapters in Revelation.
Funnily enough, reading Daniel 5, the story of the fall of Belshazzar, for a sermon yesterday (Christ the King Evensong lectionary reading), I realise there is something of a closer fit between Belshazzar and Trump (focusing on hubris, not on imminent removal and replacement) than between Trump and any figure in Revelation.
No, my pondering has yielded this thought - set of thoughts. In Revelation there is (literally) revelation or disclosure of what is hidden from usual sight. Through John the seer, we, readers, see that behind the appearance of normal life (civic authorities making decisions about sacred life, wars and threats of wars, other kinds of disaster, commercial life driven by a dominant commercial power) there may lurk the most monstrous evil, including the spilling over onto earth the heavenly warfare between the angels and demons). Now, we can argue (as Christians have done) over whether Revelation (and similar apocalypses/disclosures such as Daniel) are an insight into life "all the time/all through time", or some of the time, or just at the end of time.
Nevertheless we can note that Daniel seems to arise from the particular pressure on Israel of the Greek Empire, especially under the rule in that region of Antiochus Epiphanes, and Revelation seems to have been generated by a real fear of imminent (or, possibly, actual) persecution, with the horror of Neronian persecution in the background, from some 30+ years earlier. And, further, interest by Christians through the centuries in Revelation (and Daniel etc) has been sparked periodically by extreme conditions of life. Is it possible that Daniel and Revelation are not guides to everyday life (albeit evil lurks everywhere) but to specific, but recurring periods in history?
Furthermore, might this era be one such period, the hint being given by the evil we can see in the world today, including the unholy character of Trump (let's never forget he is a convicted felon, etc) and of the people he surrounds himself with or wishes to surround himself with?
Incidentally, a close read of Revelation highlights the deceptive character of the evil figures within it. To wonder and worry about Trump as a manifestation of evil in the world today does not mean we see no good in his policies and promises. It does mean we see the good he might get done as deceptive - masking the imminent danger the world is in as the leader of the democratic world pals around with dictators, with vaccination deniers and tariff imposers.
What then are we to do, as readers of Revelation? Pretty simple really: we heed the several calls within this book to remain faithful witnesses to Jesus Christ.
We are not called to defeat the Trumps of this world through worldly means. We are called to trust that God is on his throne (Revelation 4) and the Lamb has won all the victory we need (Revelation 5, 7, 14, 19). Filled with such faith we are to be faithful to Jesus, bearing testimony to him - and none other. We worship neither gods, nor emperors, nor angels.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The situation in the Church of England: I have nothing to add to my very few words last week. Not least, this is because a very good set of links has been posted in comments to last week's post (thank you to the "linkers"!).
Clearly the CofE has a lot of work to do, at least at the top, in order to give confidence to insiders and outsiders that the CofE is "safe." The same can be said of many other churches, including my own, in which we have made progress and are not yet perfect.
27 comments:
Taken from a wider perspective, there are very few in the bible who you would look at and say that "XYZ" is the perfect person to found a new nation/bring their people out of bondage/spread the gospel to the world/etc. With the exception of our Savior, most were deeply flawed human beings by any normal criteria. In most cases, if you tried to convince someone in advance what they would do, you would be laughed at, and rightly so. Personally, I do not place Trump in any biblical context, but consider him another time God has truly answered the prayers of millions to preserve the American Republic in the similar way. Or as someone once remarked, the divine recruiting division of HR has the strangest policies.
Peter's post makes me mindful of Christianity's long experience of empires: Babylonian, Roman, modern American imperialism etc.
I was also thinking of the similarities between Trump (or the rise of popularism) and the current crisis in the C of E. Many people, on both wings of the church, have responded to the Smyth scandal by claiming that the church is rotten "at the top", that parishes are doing their absolute best, but our leaders are "out of touch", corrupt, and "elite".
...I'm not so sure! I find myself, uncharacteristically, wanting to defend bishops! I have experienced some wonderful but also some really troubling things at a local parish level. It feels hard to hold a balanced position right now.
Akin to Peter's call not to worship emperors, I'd add: let's be very careful of what we project (our own power, darkness, woundedness, aggression, innocence, yearning for protection and merger with the divine) onto Trump, Welby, and the next Archbishop.
What is an Archbishop of Canterbury? What do we expect of them? How much power do we think they have? How is an Anglican archbishop, let alone the Archbishop of Canterbury, different to a Catholic Pope, a Methodist....of international Methodism? What is the gap between actual
ecclesiology and our fantasies of power?
From a recent debate on Thinking Anglicans:
Tim Chesteton:
"I question whether the Anglican Communion even needs a president. This gives the false impression that it’s a global organisation that needs someone to speak for it. It isn’t and it doesn’t."
David:
"A global Communion can be replaced with an international federal approach. It’s actually what Anglicanism is. It works for Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists etc. And for the Orthodox. Time to stop pretending the Communion is some big single entity. That ended with the empire."
Perhaps the next ++Canterbury might refocus their role on the Church of England (plenty needed there), and simply chair a federal committee/secretariat of churches within the Anglican Communion. Perhaps the "Commonwealth of Nations" is a model for how an Anglican Communion might operate.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_of_Nations
Being ++Canterbury must be a bit like being a parent: everyone sdumes you're on control but you actually have no power.
Enjoyed reading this post, immensely! strong agreement.
"faithful witnesses" gave me pause.. from my evangelical upbringing, I'm very familiar with the term.. but what does it really mean?
The thought that came to my mind was "faith, love and charity" which turns out to be 1 Cor 13:13. Quoting from David Benson Hart's translation:
"But now abide faith, hope, love—these three—and the greatest of these is love."
If +Peter or others might add to this.. please do :)
Thank you. ~Liz
Mark, I can only speak for myself but I've not engaged in blanket condemnation of bishops! It's a particular church culture being criticised, and persons from that culture who've ascended into influential positions in the church hierarchy - whether clergy or administrative.
I'm feeling particularly thoughtful right now, after reading this Guardian article (2017) by a man who endured Smyth-like beatings (VERY Smyth-like.. gosh!) in the UK school system ("prep school") from the age of 7-12 yrs, in the 1970s.
I read the article just prior to reading your ADU comments, Mark. The author isn't simply recounting a painful story, he shares thoughts on the British Empire, the Anglican Communion, elite education, Alpha, and "evangelical decency". Extremely interesting perspective.
I'll include a couple of paragraphs and then give the link... I'm keen to hear others' thoughts after having read the article.
"...and increasingly the Protestant public school establishment, began to promote a version of manly Christianity through the character-forming powers of chapel, rugby and the cane."
"Nonetheless, his [Justin Welby] particular brand of Eton/Alpha Course Christianity is cut from the same cloth as the muscular Christianity of the 1850s. And this is why the Church of England hierarchy remains obsessed with maintaining the Anglican communion (ie what’s left of the empire) – it is no coincidence that Smyth fled to Zimbabwe and South Africa – and why it can’t get past an over-fascination with homosexuality. The archbishop is not to blame for Smyth’s sins. But he is still too much a part of the world that made him."
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/05/john-smyth-public-school-christianity-brutality-thrashings-evangelical-decency
"Faithful witness"?...
To love and know the Source of love..?
Sounds interesting Liz. That link didn't work (for me)
Thanks Mark and +Peter.
Mark, unsure what didn't work for you re the link - it works for me (and I don't have special access of any kind). If an info panel pops up, there's an "X" at top-right where you can close it - and then the article's displayed.
But I'll assume some other factor's at play, so I'll shortly email you a pdf.. will be in your inbox soon.
If anyone else needs the same, let me know.
As the chaos of Trump begins to wind up – overnight he is proposing a 25% tariff on Canadian goods, creating panic across Canadian large and small businesses, as well as threatening Americans with a 25 % rise in oil and gas charges (America imports a lot of oil and gas from Canada – grassroots contemplative organizations I am in touch with (via email newsletters etc) report huge “shock, disillusionment, and loss or orientation.” They are turning to the Bible but not to Revelation!
This from the Center for Action and Contemplation in New Mexico:
“Exclusive reliance upon contemplative prayer in times like these leaves us almost too vulnerable now, too boundaryless, perhaps too shapeless. We need inspired words.
Psalm 57 (Honest self-pity)
Psalm 77 (A turning from Order, toward Reorder, and through Disorder)
Psalm 86 (A prayer in ordeal)
Psalm 102 (A prayer of complaint)
Psalm 131 (Begging for a contemplative mind and heart)
Psalm 146 (I told you never to “put your trust in princes,” whether Democrat or Republican, but only in God!)”
“Be merciful to me, O God; be merciful to me,
for in you my soul takes refuge;
in the shadow of your wings I will take refuge,
until the destroying storms pass by….
I lie down among lions
that greedily devour[human prey;
their teeth are spears and arrows,
their tongues sharp swords.
Be exalted, O God, above the heavens.
Let your glory be over all the earth.
They set a net for my steps;
my soul was bowed down.
They dug a pit in my path,
but they have fallen into it themselves.” (Psalm 57: 1, 4-6)
I appreciate the comments on ‘faithful witness to Jesus Christ’, thank you. For me, it is based on John 17:3-4 - ‘This is eternal life: to know you the only true God and Jesus Christ whom you have sent’. Eternal life is living with and in the presence of God and carrying that presence into my everyday life.
Essentially it is to ‘do justly, love mercy and walk humbly with our God’.
And talking of humility, I am in no doubt that the prayers of many people put Donald Trump in power. Prayer has power and concerted prayer has great power but to pray rightly requires discernment and a certain humility.
I heard a comment in 2020 that people were already expecting a second term for Donald Trump and were obviously praying to that end.
However, the Israelites’ demand for a king comes to mind. God gave them what they wanted in Saul, who was God’s anointed leader, but although he dealt with the Philistines to certain extent, he did not lead his nation in a godly way and was rejected in favour of David, who was ‘a man after God’s own heart’.
To ask for a leader of your choice without submitting the request to the sovereign will of God at the same time is a dangerous practice that is basically presumptuous. The question to ask is ‘Is Donald Trump a leader after the order of Saul or after the order of David?’
I found that question in Gene Edwards’ book, ‘A Tale of Three Kings’, which talks about the relationships between Saul, David and Absalom. His answer was that time and events will reveal it.
We wait and see…
The current reactions look like the shaking promised in Hebrews 12:26-29 so that ‘what cannot be shaken will remain’.
Faithful witnesses:
"...we keep on keeping on as Christians, day by day, Sunday by Sunday..."
The warden at our church with kind eyes; the woman who serves the tea from the kitchen at the back, and who keeps a tin marked "Gluten-free biscuits" for my daughter with Celiac's.
"Eternal life is living with and in the presence of God and carrying that presence into my everyday life."
Anne, who stepped out of her studio one day and suddenly felt - "I am living in eternity ". Who then instructed her husband to cut their rectangular back lawn into a circle.
"The narcissist's salvation is not in their accomplishments, specialness, or uniqueness...but in discovery of their human ordinariness."
- Stephen Johnson, Character Styles
I appreciate seeing what others are thinking.. thanks folk.
My mind's been off in a different direction. FWIW...
Thinking of Revelation. Other than the messages to the churches, I tend to think of the harlot church colluding with State corruption and violence. When I think about what I've read in respect to white Christian voting in the US (evangelical, mainline, Catholic) it's a niggle in my subconscious that won't let up - because of the high level of MAGA-Trump support. The intense loyalty to a vindictive and cruel 'strongman' is astonishing, as is the embrace of an unholy alliance between sacred and profane, church and state. [disclosure.. some 'thinking aloud' from one who hasn't had any formal theological education]
Just prior to posting, it struck me that +Peter in his essay has referred five times to "evil", and toward the end, twice to "deceptive". The Bible has a lot to say about evil and deceit.
When we find deceit in the Church, as we inevitably do, we should be *especially* concerned.. as followers of Jesus we are witnesses to *the Truth*. We are called to be people of Truth!
John 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.
1 John 5:6 (part) ..And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.
For better insight into CofE responses to abuse, importantly from the perspective of survivors, I recommend this video I've just watched. Cathy Newman in dialogue with survivors about their experience of CofE response (not Smyth victims). The first, Matthew Ineson, is the survivor whose case is at the heart of Bishop Helen-Ann Hartley's much publicised "coercive letter". The next is Nadine Dorries (former Conservative MP and Culture Secretary) abused by a vicar when a child. She spoke to three bishops in the House of Lords "who sat me 12 foot down a room and treated me as though I was a contagion when they were talking to me". The word "underhand" is used by Ineson, and Dorries agrees with the use of that word in regard to her case and how it was handled. The same video also explores whether the House of Lords should continue with the current inclusion of "Lords Spiritual" in the House.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujq5ARaQiKs
Hi Liz,
Thank you. It certainly feels like an important moment for victims of abuse to finally be heard and have their experiences- especially their experiemces of not being heard - acknowledged. We might expect a flood of voices coming forward now - painful but so necessary.
A big moment for the Church of England. Shamefully, it didn't initiate this, but it is an opportunity to reform and refocus, to even win back some scraps of trust. It seems clear that many other bishops need to resign, probably ++York as well. Could the church front-foot this, or at least respond boldly (Welby's motto for the church was "simpler, hbler, bolder")?
....full accountability (including resignations) for silencing; complete independence of safeguarding; removing unelected bishops from House of Lords; review establishment; refocus ++Canterbury on the urgent needs of the Church of England and federalize leadership of the Communion?
This will be the challenge for the next Archbishop as clearly nothing is going to happen much (apart from resignations and accountability one hopes) until then. We wait.
I'm jumping the gun - as I'm wont to - with that last bit on ++Canterbury and the communion. Better to just say: review the role of ++Canterbury with regards to the Communion.
It maybe that Global Anglicanism goes the way of other Protestant churches like Lutherans and Methodists who afilliate internationally but don't have a figurehead, retain completely local decision making. It maybe that Anglicanism goes the way of Orthodoxy with its independent "auto-cephalous" churches but a cultural sense of deference to one patriarch as the elder brother. But neither feels quite right . Anglicanism isn't just another Protestant church run on presbyterian lines: we have something symbolically precious in ++Canterbury as a symbolic unifie. Perhaps the mana and history of Canterbury could be invested in more than one person like our three tikanga system? And Anglicanism feels so much more theologically diverse than Orthodoxy. We hope for something authentic, attuned to present reality, and Spirit led!
It maybe that Global Anglicanism splits along Puritan vs Broad Church lines, as it historically has done (c/f. Methodism, Baptists, Quakers, Brethren, Salvation Army etc). That feels painful but perhaps increasingly inevitable.
Keen to hear your views, Peter. You could keep posting on this until Christmas if you like, and we'll into the New Year!...alongside the sanity of staying small and ordinary and attuning to Advent. When are these questions urgent and necessary to not avoid, and when do they become distractions from the big/ small God who is here?
It maybe that nothing actually changes with regard to the Communion - Canterbury remains as elder brother/sister and symbol of unity (to be Anglican is to be in full communion with the See of Canterbury) but with no power to force national bodies to sfopt this or that (as is currently the case) but that effectively, functionally, actually the activity of Canterbury focusses on England, not supporting and liasing with international churches (that gets dejegated to a present body).
I note this article https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2024/29-november/news/uk/makin-was-wrong-retired-senior-police-officers-say
as helping us to more accurately understand what CofE leadership may have gotten right when a number of commentators abroad in the Communion say otherwise.
In respect of the Communion: I am committed to a Communion and not to a Federation. I think more help could be given to the ABC in the running of diocese, church and Communion organizations ... the Pope is the Bishop of Rome etc and has quite a staff to assist ... the General-Secretary of the Anglican Communion is already an important role but perhaps more should be made of it re "holding the Communion together."
The issue of *exactly* what the ABC or the Bishop of Ely did (or didn't do) isn't the primary issue for me - it's not whether they did the bare minimum - it's whether they, by virtue of their position, could have done *more*. That doesn't mean I'm uninterested in reading the opinions of the police officers.. I am. But it goes in the mix with other things I've read or experienced.
I'm thinking of a person (P) close to me who decades ago in Auckland was responsible for a commercial property - caretaking, grounds, security. P noticed a major water leak in the city water system which was wasting a lot of water - and this in time of drought when the city was telling everyone to save water. P phones the City and reports the leak. This goes on for days with repeated phone calls but no-one turns up to fix the leak. P eventually goes to the well-connected CEO/Director who then phones the Mayor. Within hours the leak is fixed.
The ABC by virtue of his office and his seat in the House of Lords has influence with a far greater range of people than most other individuals. ++JW has also risen from the same evangelical ranks as Smyth and knows those people and that culture well. Could he have used his position and contacts to move things along? He's hardly helpless!
What I'm seeing is a culture that didn't care enough about survivors to prioritise their needs, dig into what was happening, and pursue justice with determination. In 2013 (yep!) Bishop Croft decided not to pass on to police the information he'd received from Matthew Ineson (the same survivor in the video link I shared previously in this thread)...
"During the Radio 4 broadcast in July 2017 Bishop Croft was asked why he had not passed Matt’s written disclosure to him, which dates back to 2013, to the police. The response was that he had taken the unilateral decision not to pass on the disclosure because he personally didn’t consider there was sufficient in it to pass on. This was a clear breach of safeguarding procedures." [1] - Surviving Church 07-Sep-18
And then there's the issue of trust in police and whether thats necessarily warranted - I treat what they say with as much caution as other statements. In general terms, police have often been found untrustworthy - some seriously corrupt! So I also have in mind part of a personal comment I read in [1] after the main post...
"My diocese is riddled with ex-police in positions of influence and I can honestly say that one of the poorest, most outrageous and dishonest responses into a formal complaint about the DSA has come from them. So sadly I wouldn’t go to the police with any sort of confidence, I just assume they are hand in glove with the diocese and MP."
[1] https://survivingchurch.org/2018/09/07/the-matt-ineson-story-continued/
Thank you for that article, Peter. It confirms for me that this is really difficult territory.
Good also to have space to think through larger picture stuff, too: I've landed agreeing with you about the Communion.
Back in April, Bishop Helen-Ann Hartley was in conversation with Fr Alex Frost on The God Cast - I found it this morning. It's a deep and thoughtful conversation and I mention two parts in particular. Early in the conversation she's asked about her time in NZ (3:30) - fascinating! And given recent events, it's so very interesting to hear their discussion around Safeguarding (17:00). Apart from those, there's also much more! Food banks, poverty, inequality, LLF/SSB.
In the context of safeguarding and importance of full independence (post Jay Report) she said straight-up that she is, "very much in a minority in the House of Bishops around this and I just find that really distressing and embarrassing if I'm honest." (19:40)
"...attempts have been made to silence me and you know I'm not going to be intimidated because I do think this is a really, really important matter.. and a bishop needs to speak up about that I think, it's part of the leadership role" (24:20)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgConXy2Yc4
Could the C of E actually have a female ABC - with its parallel system of misogynist bishops?
https://www.womenandthechurch.org/blog/1ztu7hsl1kqjfr4yif51yviuq7w0rz
I'd come across that article too, Mark. About your Q.. I'm very doubtful! As I've dug deep into the Safeguarding/Abuse context of the CofE, I've been amazed at how entangled the CofE is with politics, peerage, Royals. The way people get appointed to senior positions in the church there - it's alien to anything I'm familiar with. I haven't looked into how people get appointed to the Archbishops Council - and if an incoming ABC can change who sits on that body. If not, it's difficult to imagine how a female ABC could effect significant change in the church culture. ++JW in his resignation statement said, "For nearly twelve years I have struggled to introduce improvements." The word "struggled" speaks volumes doesn't it? How much more so for a female ABC for whom there are even more barriers?!
Absolutely
Post a Comment