Two thoughts

My two thoughts for the morning. As the BBC moves to replace the CofE as the national church of no belief, as parts of the BBC becomes more irrelevant in the new world is it possible The BBC will consume itself with its left wing cynical view? When the issue of faith is shown the back door and told not to come back who will the new priests and priestess pour their cynicism on? Perhaps themselves? For we all need the other voice who we don’t agree with to gain a greater understanding of who and what we are.  History tells us every regime needs someone to bully

Secondly, will The Church not be better without these platforms of privilege? When we are no longer welcome on the platform of privilege as will happen at some point, will we not need to shape up to redefine what we believe, what we have to share, what we don’t need? Privilege tends to make you slow on your feet, breed chummy inward looking relationships, privilege steals from people the ability to move under the defining culture of the day.  


  1. To me the BBC looks rather right-wing, there's objective evidence to show that it favours Conservative representatives over Labour and that even more right-wing nationalists are well represented, for example, Nigel Farage has been on QT at least 31 times, making him one of the most frequent panel members.

    The second paragraph I think, I'd agree with : a disestablished CofE would be liberated IMHO to not have to toe the Patriotic / Nationalist line and perhaps this would give it a better opportunity to present the gospel authentically.

    Consider one of the major issues with the church in the US in the Trump era. By associating so strongly with a narcissistic, nationalistic, despot and pursuing policies which punish the poor, the vulnerable, and foreigners (except for the Russian Oligarchy of course), creation (via the rejection of the Paris Agreement and the subversion of the EPA) while lining the pockets of the rich and powerful with tax cuts and overt cronyism and nepotism; Trump's Christians play into the worst of accusations of utterly unchristian hypocrisy.

    The same pious Evangelicals who voted for G W Bush and cheered as he launched a war on Iraq that destroyed over 66% of the church in that country while scattering most of the rest are shamelessly back for a turbo-charged "Only America First" round 2 catastrophe. How God's heart bleeds and it's not surprising that the US church is losing members at an accelerating rate :-(

    Well, I seem to have gone off on one here, but the upshot I think is that we'd be better off with less of that kind of relationship with the state.

  2. Sorry Nigel, can't agree with you here! All but the last two sentences of your first paragraph are just polemical. Makes you feel better but that's all! I'd go with Snial in his/her view of the BBC. Withdrawal of privilege can be painful, but that is what the CoE/churches are experiencing and I see that as healthy.

    The individuals who have stood out to me are the people who have been invited in because of themselves and their message rather than just a label to fill a God slot (that probably shouldn't be a capital letter there.)

    You are absolutely right in your second paragraph in my view. There is an interesting article in this month's "Theology" magazine about "blessing" - a wedding, a nuclear submarine - what are we actually doing or saying. It's about trying to disengage from old mindsets and hearing afresh.

    And are you still coming up
    to see us?

    best wishes to you both.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Response To Bishop North