Faith today
Sir, To change my name seems like a misfortune but to change my sex as well looks like carelessness (Letters, 22 July): it is Mave Dellor not Dave Mellor!!
Surely as Christians what we should be about first and foremost is bringing people to the Lord, then those who are rich will want to give their money away to help the poor as many do already. What I would like to see in CEN is folk who have activities that have reconnected with people or reached those outside the faith sharing those with others.
Tony Cullingford and Reg Lobb (22 July) have got it right.
Mave Dellor,
Leamington Spa
Women bishops
Sir, The proposals for the arrangements for those unhappy with the ordination of women bishops are out for consultation amongst PCCs and deaneries. The ordination issue itself has been debated at length, but there are many aspects. The front page (22 July) quotes David Phillips, who seems to suggest that evangelicals are moving the goalposts.
We need to recognise that the Church is part of an evolution. We started with Adam and reached a Jewish state via Abraham and the Children of Israel. The Church came from The Way. The Rev David Phillips is right in that we do not do away with founding principles: Jesus Christ, though a revolutionary, came not to abolish the Law and the Prophets.
The Church needs to be guided by the Holy Spirit to adapt to culture of the day whilst not conforming to the spirit of the age. It thus can be argued that ordaining women comes out of the former whilst embracing homosexuality comes out of the latter.
Bishops, in today’s terms, are not mentioned in scripture: we simply have guidance for those in spiritual oversight and those who serve in the church. These must apply to bishops, but it is curious that some think that a gender qualification applies to some but not others: thus if a woman can be ordained, she must logically be admissible to the Episcopate. Probably not many actually believe that, but just want to play Canute and want to hold the tide back.
The battle was lost centuries ago. Some popes became very ungodly men. We started worshipping servants. (The word Minister is the same as servant, deacon and slave, yet in calling them reverend we are saying they should be revered). Fortunately it is far less common nowadays, but some parsons still think that the congregation’s role is to look up to them whilst they look down on the congregation.
People are up in arms that clergy should be male, yet far less fuss is made over their radiating Christ, believing in the physical resurrection or upholding orthodox doctrine.
Scripture makes no standalone statement that Presbyters should be male. What we do have is part of a string of credentials. These include his being married – who complains about single priests, which are actually standard in the Roman Catholic Church?
Finally I note that Luke does not mention a single female apostle, whilst carefully drawing our attention to the likes of Lydia and the husband & wife Priscilla and Aquila. I contend that whilst males should be the norm, which is why Paul would use ‘man’, women may also participate. Gender balance is very much of the spirit of the age
Colin Bricher,
Northampton
Confirmation
Sir, Jonathan Perkin employs a strange choice of text to say that the Holy Spirit is given in Conversion and not in Confirmation (Letters, 29 July). In Acts 2:38 St Peter exhorts those who wish to receive the Holy Spirit to repent and be baptised. It is the opinion of scholars that Apostolic Baptism also included the laying-on of hands, which was later called “Confirmation” and made into a separate service. The reason why Simon Magus offered money to the Apostles to have the same gift as they had, must have been because he saw something real happening to people when they laid hands on them. Would that present day confirmations were so lively!
The Rev JD Wright,
Brighton
Benediction
Sir, On Benediction and the 39 Articles, JD Wright provides an interesting answer to Elizabeth Dye’s thoughtful letter. Being a bit of a Calvinist myself, I suspect that I am rather warmer to the Articles than he is. He is of course correct in reminding us that the articles merely ‘bear witness’ to ‘the faith uniquely revealed in the Holy Scriptures’ and so the ultimate appeal is to scripture which is the touchstone for all Christian theology and the standard against which the Articles should be judged.
However, with regard to Benediction, I think that the Articles have it spot on. Whatever theories we may have about what happens to the bread and the wine in Communion, it is clear that Jesus gave us a meal to remember his death and resurrection, not elements to contain and control his presence.
One of the helpful developments over the past decades is the renewed emphasis on the Holy Spirit; it is to the Spirit we should look for God’s real presence.
The Rev Peter Davey,
Ilkeston, Derbys
Bible and women
Sir, Women’s ordination again! Will Stephen Kuhrt (22 July) representing ‘Fulcrum’, please explain: a) how, where and why ‘The Bible supports it and the mission of the church requires it! (his words)? b) why ‘Preaching, evangelism, pastoral work, decision-making, etc.’ (again, his words) cannot be done equally well by (for example) Lay Readers and Church Army Evangelists? The plain fact is that when people are ordained, whatever their suitability or otherwise, they mostly become eligible for appointment as curates and subsequently as incumbents, and thus to be paid for doing these jobs. Is it then a case of ‘Follow the money’ – and a new career option for girls? I wonder what St Paul would have made of that?
JM Hughes,
Heaton Mersey, Stockport
Selective?
Sir, JC Crosthwaite (letters, 15 July) appeals to tradition and common sense for the case against women’s ordination. We are all selective in our appeals to tradition but perhaps JC Crosthwaite is also against women churchwardens and readers – or doctors, solicitors and prime ministers for that matter. The church has a history of adaptation, adjusting its practices to meet the needs of its times; changing slowly it is true, to ensure that it doesn’t merely follow transient fashion.
Christ came to earth as a human being, and therefore the symbolism, as I see it, is that the celebrant at the Eucharist represents his humanity. To suggest that the celebrant symbolises only the maleness of Christ limits the symbolism to only half of the incarnation.
In an earthly family, a mother is needed as much as is a man, so the analogy with the church or parish family does not hold. In the church it makes sense that when posts of leadership need to be filled, the best person for the job should be chosen, irrespective of gender.
Derrick Gierth,
Bingham, Nottingham
Holy Land?