Few things in life are more reliable than that the BBC will celebrate Holy Week by running a story which causes controversy about Christianity; the only thing more reliable is that it won’t do the same about Islam during Ramadan. The latest, to be found here reveals that nearly a quarter of ‘Christians’ do not believe in the Resurrection. However, 1 in to people with no religion said they sort of believed in some way int e Resurrection, prompting this: ‘The Church of England said it showed many people held religious beliefs.’ I fear what it really shows is the failure of the Established Church in this country to do much in the way of religious education. One of the more remarkable bit of the piece was a vicar saying that: ‘”I think [people answering the survey] are being asked to believe in the way they might have been asked to believe when they were at Sunday school.’ Quite apart from the fact that it is doubtful that many people even go to Sunday School, one wonders quite what she thought was being taught at Anglican Sunday Schools? Then, with all the confidence of a modernist who doesn’t know better, she pronounced: ‘”So to ask an adult to believe in the resurrection the way they did when they were at Sunday school simply won’t do and that’s true of much of the key elements of the Christian faith.” She tells us that” And an adult faith requires that it be constantly questioned, constantly re-interpreted, which incidentally is very much what modern church is actually about.’ Indeed, and in that apercu lies much of what has gone wrong with the Church of England.
All of this reinterpreting, has it served the Gospel, has it brought more people into Church and to Christ? It would not only be hard to evidence that, it would, given Church attendance and membership, be easy to show that it has had the opposite effect. A watered down Faith is not one anyone would doe for, so why should anyone live for it, or by its precepts? Either Jesus Christ was the Son of God and He died on the Cross for our sins, and was resurrected on the third day or, as St Paul says, our faith is in vain. If Christ has not risen then ‘your faith is futile’. Presumably those 31% of Christians who do not believe in life after death agree that their faith is futile, and one presumes they are a large part of the 37% who never go to Church but claim to be Christians?
The Bishop of Manchester, the Right Reverend David Walker, said:
“This important and welcome survey proves that many British people, despite not being regular churchgoers, hold core Christian beliefs.
“Alongside them it finds surprisingly high levels of religious belief among those who follow no specific religion, often erroneously referred to as secularists or atheists.
“This demonstrates how important beliefs remain across our society and hence the importance both of religious literacy and of religion having a prominent place in public discourse.”
Alternatively, it proves that despite having an Established Church, the country has very little idea about Christianity, which shows the utter failure of Anglican schools to pass on the faith. You pays your money and you takes your choice.
Part of the problem is that we have lost our discourse of “Kingdom of Light vs. Kingdom of Darkness.” The Gentiles know how oppressive the system they inhabit really is. Our advertising industry alone has blood on its hands, let own other ways in which people are brainwashed, abused, controlled, manipulated, oppressed. We should be proclaiming the victory of Christ over the principalities and their eventual destruction at His hands. Those who will enter into covenant with YHWH will be spared and, more than that, exalted as His beloved children. Those who align themselves with Death and Hades will be obliterated. As Moses offered the Children of Israel: Life or Death. Those who deny God – they have chosen death. May they repent. May we all repent.
Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, dona nobis requiem.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We seem, as a society, to have narrowed ourselves to a small range of sensory experiences – sad 😔
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, for which I blame David Hume, amongst others. He is, of course, guilty of circular reasoning regarding miracles, which is why his conclusion and those of other sceptics is invalid. Miracles are fundamentally an a priori question, not an a posteriori one. Alas the modernism that has sapped the supernatural element is found in all quarters, not just the C of E. We need to return to the view of the earliest Church Fathers (e.g. Irenaeus) who understood the proliferation of evil in our world as the consequence of angelic powers, not just human ones.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Satan’s best trick is convincing people he does not exist. His second best is encouraging Christians to fight with each other.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Agreed, which is why I am glad you and I get along. I know when the time comes, regardless of doctrinal differences, you and I will both be praying, “Lord Jesus Christ, empower your servant Michael the Archangel to cast down from Heaven Satan and his armies.”
LikeLiked by 3 people
God alone knows why He allows such differences, but our job is not to exacerbate them 😊
LikeLiked by 2 people
Well, I think the free will issue is in there… 🙂 Come the resurrection, no one will care anymore. We’ll be eating the proverbial “fatted calf”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good post from you today Nicholas.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you. 🙂 I’ve been thinking about that hymn a lot lately. One of my friends at the office comes from a Catholic background (although he is not a believer anymore) and he was asking me about what Protestants did at Easter, so I told him some of the hymns we sing.
LikeLike
Thank you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good to have some help – those who complained about Malcolm have not, of course, provided anything to replace him.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, I write when I feel able, but sometimes it is difficult. This place has been through the wars and at moments I have felt things in my spirit. I would like the remnant to hold together – times are going to get tough very soon.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It would be a shame to see it go – although a partisan spirit has almost seen it off more than once.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Alas, yes. Unfortunately it is human nature to remember the negatives and forget the good things, but there is still a real spirit of friendship here, which is worth fighting for. And there is a commitment to the Gospel here: no contributor here has ever advocated that one can reach the Father apart from Jesus. As long as we remain true to Yahweh, we will have maintained a witness. No god is like Yahweh, and He is our God.
LikeLiked by 2 people
To link to some earlier posts. When we talk about Christ and His cross we are all evangelical, we are all catholic. Which is what binds us in one body to Him.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Jesus’ resurrection is a pledge – AKA “firstfruits” – that all will be raised, that all will give account to Him and all will kneel before His throne, whether willingly, as the Twenty-Four Elders, or unwillingly. The resurrection is His vindication from the Father that He is Yahweh in the flesh, Israel’s Redeemer.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I fear that for a generation at least since Vatican II, the Catholic Church also failed to pass on the Faith; when you read the Gospels you wonder what the Apostles would have made of Sunday School; they would certainly have fallen foul of the Vicar who asked them to question everything they had learnt – from Christ Himself. The wonderful think about reading e.g. the words of St Peter is their straightforward simplicity; he was less well educated than St Paul and less subtle in his theology. I think when people say in surveys that they are ‘spiritual’ or ‘Christian’ they are not talking about creeds or dogmas (which they don’t know); they associate Christianity with ‘goodness’ and they want to be thought of as on the ‘good’ side’ being ‘spiritual’ means they are not vulgar materialists like atheists. We live in a post-Christian society; that’s the plain truth; sad in one way but in another it means that those who do believe really have to stand up and be counted and not hide their light under a bushel.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Many things have led to the loss of faith in our own generation and in those who have followed us. The savagery of world and local wars, the legacies of colonisation, the fracturing of communities by long commutes and the confining of interaction between people to social media have strained all human relationships.
LikeLiked by 1 person
These things are very true – but not being taught the Faith is fundamental. If you know your Faith you at least have a sure basis for questioning the world’s values; if you don’t, you are tossed about by the media, the zeitgeist, your own weaknesses and so on. If you haven’t been taught simple arithmetic you can’t add up or subtract; you are lost in the world of numeracy. If you don’t know that you are created by God, that Jesus is our Saviour and all the other credal statements, you are lost spiritually and usually morally as well. The early Christians lived in times of war, persecution, slavery, cruelty and barbarism but they were not crushed; indeed, their Faith gave them the strength to surmount all the attacks and persecutions. They actually believed in eternal life that awaited them after death.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Yes. Without my faith, I would be a lost soul too.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I agree, Francis. We are, alas, living in a post-Christian society – which makes me wonder what the Established Church has been doing to earn its keep?
LikeLiked by 1 person
They’ve been fighting man made global warming of course. I think that if you do that you are certain to go to Heaven in today’s Church. 🙂
LikeLike
Again, you go into some visceral clutch about the left and the liberals, which, of course, simply reflects nothing but your own prejudices.
LikeLike
That’s me: prejudice, denier, selfish, rigid . . . I can’t remember if you ever called me a misogynist or not. If not, why don’t you if it will make you feel better.
LikeLike
Let’s see: ‘denier’= someone who denies climate change despite the overwhelming scientific consensus – tick; selfish = ‘If you don’t like it take it up with God: that was His advice as you know and I suppose His point was that we should be selfish.’ A direct quotation from you recommending selfishness – tick; rigid, not sure I called you that, but if the cap fits. In short, I have simply described some of your attributes, and, as usual, you go overboard and add a couple more I didn’t use. If it lights your candle, fair enough.
LikeLike
No. You simply answer as all liberals do with insults. Brilliant, herr professor.
LikeLike
Are you saying you are not a climate change denier and you did not write what I quoted? They are the two adjectives I used. The other two, you used and, in best Trump fashion, attributed to me – but they were #fakenews 🙂
LikeLike
Just reminding you of how the insult developed at the hands of the Liberal Elitists. It began as “flat earth’s” and is now being spoken of as being “deniers” . . . even to the point of wanting them to be jailed or punished: http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/hans-von-spakovsky/attorney-general-lynch-looks-prosecuting-climate-change-deniers
Who decides what is fake news C. You? Or has this whole new foolish back and forth simply going to degenerate into the left wing is real news and the right wing is fake news or vice versa?
LikeLike
None of which changes the facts about climate change. I do not subscribe to your binary left/right simplicities – life is more complex.
LikeLike
I don’t . . . it is shorthand for the tactics and I am not deceived by the lack of true conservatives. I fully understand that they are mostly using the same tactics and have similar goals. That is not to say that the ideology being followed was developed by the left and that the right has many who embrace their outlook.
LikeLike
You attribute far too much consistency to human beings and you seem to see conspiracies everywhere.
LikeLike
No you are quick to call everything a conspiracy. I am simply a bystander that is skeptical of those who tell me the sky is falling everytime I read the news.
LikeLike
No, you keep referring to powerful forces behind things – that’s anyone’s definition of conspiracy. As an historian I cannot think of one successful large-scale conspiracy.
LikeLike
Actually, I am a believer in the science of those scientists that they call ‘deniers’. I’m not a scientist but I know where I stand from a purely common sense view of the Gospels.
These are a few of the deniers that they are trying to discredit: List of notable climate scientists who do not believe in AGW
LikeLike
The Gospel has nothing to do with the science of climate change. You are most welcome to the shadow-world of the deniers – which is not an insult but simply a description of your position.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Institutions, such as the Established Church, can seem to carry on as ‘normal’ on the outside for a long time, even when they are dead or slowly dying within. The Jewish synagogue in Jerusalem at the time of Christ seemed a powerful and ancient institution, symbolised by the Temple – but it was destroyed and its followers dispersed within a few years.
LikeLike
It was either George Lindbeck or Robert Jenson (both of them Lutheran theologians), who stated that in every age with the changes in language and cultural worldview, that the Church must find a way to articulate the gospel in the language and ideas of their own time, while not compromising the message. He gave an example of the sacrificial language of the gospel, how we postmoderns don’t have any substantial concept of religious sacrifice, at least not to the extent the early Christians would have understood it,and therefore to preach the gospel primarily in terms of propitiation and sacrifice is to speak a language largely unintelligible to many. The early Christians arguably had an easier time articulating the gospel and its sacrificial language to the ancient pagan Romans and Jews alike, who both understood quite well the importance of sacrifice in religion, as both societies were saturated in it. Justin Martyr utilized the philosophical language and concepts of his time to communicate to the gospel to those within his own context. How then, to articulate the message to post-Christian 21st century Westerners so that we can understand, but without altering the message? Or how are we to speak the gospel in terms that communicate a deep sense of relevance to those within the body of Christ, without falling prey to the idol of pop-culture Christianity and the faddish false concept of “relevance”? In trying to relate Christian concepts to the sensibilities of people within our context, Robert Jenson is fond of speaking of sin not in terms of personal infraction of a law (though he doesn’t deny this aspect of it), but in terms of “self-accomplished alienation from our destiny, from our own meaning in the world…faithlessness to God’s promise of true humanity, of a life of freedom for each other.” (Story of Promise). I think such use of concepts and language probably would be more intelligible to people nowadays, to use an example. I think we in the West have become jaded with the heavily judicial language that traditionally we’ve employed to communicate the ideas of our Faith. The post-Vatican 2 mass seems to be more celebratory in focus, contrasted to the more sacrificial emphasis of the traditional Latin mass.
It’s obvious the Church of England and the American mainline Protestant bodies have failed miserably at the task of communicating the gospel. Since they have tried to assimilate themselves to the world, they’ve reduced their own institutions to meaninglessness. Newer, faddish “non-denominational” churches are springing up everywhere in my neck of the woods, but having visited one of two of them, I can say they too are failing at this as they chase their idols of “relevance” (badly plagiarizing pop-culture entertainment) even though they articulate a largely traditional form of personal morality.
I say all of that to point out that in our post-Christian ultra-materialistic society, whether we’re talking about the United States or Western Europe, we’ve jettisoned traditional forms of Christian faith that underpinned our social structures and formed our collective worldview, and as a result we’re reaping the whirlwind of despair as we sell our souls to consumerism, the shifting sands of secular humanism, and mindless entertainment. Suicide is on the rise and the temptation to despair is great, since we’re collectively in the process of rejecting the very Christian meta-narrative that once gave a sense of purpose to life. I feel the weight of despair and personal darkness from time to time, and it’s only my faith in Christ that gives meaning to my life and holds me back from becoming entirely lost into the precipice of this despair, in my worst moments. For me, the theological idea of “justification” also means that the Passion of Christ justifies my reason for existing. I suspect that as we continue to collectively plunge headlong into the existential void as a society, we will begin to once again recognize the importance of traditional religion, the type that we’d be willing to die for. I don’t know if any of this rant was relevant to the discussion, but this is what came to mind when I read this and the comments.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I agree that we have compromised too much with popular culture. Now I don’t mean this in terms of music: I like Matt Redman, Chris Tomlin, Hillsong, etc. But I think it is foolish to think you can convert outsiders by saying, “Hey we’ve got great music too.” Even if they like the music – it is meaningless to them if they don’t believe in Christ. the point of our music is to worship God. That is why I often hate going to church when I am in a bad place spiritually. I can’t stand singing hymns if I’m not right with God – it’s hypocrisy. So why should we expect our songs to win over non-believers.
The non-believer is looking for authenticity and rest. This is why we have to stop trying clever schemes to trick them into Christianity – that is fundamentally unloving and, to borrow from Kant, treats them as means rather than ends. We need to be honest with people and risk our relationships and friendships. “I want to talk to you about Jesus. Do you want to hear it: yes or no?” If “No”, then we dust off our sandals and walk on. This is what we should be doing with our money as churches – we should be prioritising missionary work in parts of the world where they want to hear the Gospel.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Your statement that non-believers are looking for authenticity and rest, hits the nail on the head. Equally true for lifelong Christians as well. I grew up in a good church, by any Southern Baptist standards, but I well remember the gimmicky evangelism efforts we were introduced to in high school youth group. They usually involved inviting our “un-churched” friends to a concert that just happened to be a Christian rock concert of some sort, or an evening social event at the church where gospel preaching would be suddenly sprung on us toward the end, and were encouraged to underplay the obvious religious agenda of such events and act like it was just an ordinary social function. These tactics were blatantly cheesy and hypocritical, and I imagine such things were commonplace for other church-goers who were high school age in the late 90’s and early 2000’s. It strikes me as no accident then, why more traditional forms of Christianity are on the rise among believers–the increasing popularity of traditional Reformed theology, a growing interest among Catholics in the old Latin mass, and the growing popularity of Eastern Orthodoxy in the United States. This is of course, for those who haven’t just jumped ship altogether and left the Christian faith. We have robbed the body of Christ of authenticity, not to mention the non-believing world that is in search of the very thing we have attempted to downplay over the years to be more “seeker-friendly”.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thanks for this Steven; it’s not a rant at all, but a question we all ask ourselves. It is true that post-modern Man (for want of a better description) finds the idea of ‘sacrifice’ quite alien – unlike the Romans for example. However, St Augustine says, “Our hearts are made for you, O Lord…” This means the hearts of everyone, not just Christians. It suggests that deep down people are longing for the Truth and for Christ. in other words, if we tell them about Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross out of love for us, they will, if they are open to the message, be given the grace to understand it. We don’t need to water down Christ. We must remember that it is the Holy Spirit who enlightens them, not our own efforts. We have to be, as Mother Teresa used to say of herself, “a pencil in God’s hands.” The Truth doesn’t always come in words; the right music at the right time, or a painting or a poem – these can also be vehicles of Truth. The late Cardinal Avery Dulles says he was converted from youthful atheism at Harvard by looking at a flower in Spring; he was instantly struck by the divine beauty of the natural world. Simone Weil was moved by visiting Chartres Cathedral, and so on.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I do wonder sometimes whether parts of the Church are “struggling under their own weight”. The Church has the Great Commission: this is an obligation, it is non-negotiable. It also has the obligation within the great commission to teach (“make disciples of”) those who become Christians. The Early Church turned the Roman Empire upside down (and presumably bits of the Sassanid Empire before the Muslims invaded) – and it did this largely through synagogues and house-churches. I am not proposing that all churches convert into house churches – it is good that we have public institutions that non-Christians can turn to along with Christians in their hour of need, what some sociologists call the “Spiritual Health Service”. But I think a number of churches should consider “trimming the fat” – getting rid of non-essentials.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I think that is increasing the direction of travel.
LikeLiked by 2 people
trimming the fat – getting rid of non essentials – yes Sir.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think Pope Francis is right in saying we have to become a ‘Church of the Poor’ – and for the poor. We are all poor in spiritual terms; it is easy to let the ‘institution’ take over and hide behind a facade. That was the impetus behind the medieval, itinerant preaching friars – to take Christ to the people where they were, especially the ‘unchurched’.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Fundamental is our personal trust in and love for our Lord.
LikeLike