eChurch Blog

The Catholic Herald

Pope is ‘not a true Christian leader’, most believers say By Mark Greaves

Two thirds of Christians in Britain do not think the Pope is a true Christian leader, according to a new poll.

The poll, conducted by ComRes, found that only 38 per cent of Christians surveyed agreed that “Catholic popes are true ambassadors of the Christian faith”. The figure dropped to 16 per cent among Baptists.

Several Protestant ministers – some of whom are involved in ecumenical work – said they were not surprised by the low level of support for the Pope.

They said that even Protestants who work with Catholics at a grassroots level are still likely to find the idea of papal authority “particularly difficult”.

The poll, which surveyed over 500 British Christians, found that 39 per cent of Methodists and 36 per cent of Anglicans who were polled believed that the Pope was a true Christian representative.

It also reported a high level of admiration for John Paul II, with just over two thirds of respondents saying they admired him “greatly” or “somewhat”.

That figure was not matched when respondents were asked about Pope Benedict XVI. Only 47 per cent of those surveyed said they admired him.

The trend was followed by Catholics. Eighty-six per cent said they “greatly” admired John Paul II whereas 65 per cent said the same of Benedict XVI.

Among Baptists – who again showed the lowest level of support for the Pope – almost half said they admired John Paul but only 24 per cent said they admired Benedict XVI.

The Rev Mark Fisher, executive secretary of the Free Churches Group, said Protestant attitudes to the Catholic Church had “softened” in recent years. But he said that some Protestant groups would still not join ecumenical bodies if they included Catholics.

He said: “We still have denominations in membership [of the Free Churches Group] because they don’t join the Churches Together in England because of the membership of the Roman Catholic Church.”

He suggested that conservative denominations were more concerned with “the liberal division in Christianity” rather than the divide between Protestants and Catholics.

He asked that many Protestants would agree with the Pope on a number of issues.

“But, insofar as what the Pope says comes out of the history and tradition of the Catholic Church, they would not be quite so quick to jump on board,” he added.

A Baptist minister, who preferred to be quoted anonymously, agreed that the figures were not surprising.

He said: “Some Baptists would not want to give the Pope any credence as a representative of the Christian faith. Others who are very open to working with the Catholic Church would not want to necessarily see the Pope as a representative with any kind of authority… The position of the Pope is a particularly difficult issue in working with local Catholics.”

But he said relations had improved. “At one time Baptists would not want anything to do with the Pope,” he said.

The Rev Jeremy Brooks, the director of ministry at the Protestant Truth Society, said: “All true Protestants believe the papacy to be unbiblical, unnecessary and unhelpful. Churches governed by scripture alone rather than the traditions of men or the fashions of the moment are what broken Britain so desperately needs.”

Mr Brooks said the poll suggested that “despite a serious lack of clear moral and spiritual leadership emanating from Canterbury it would seem that Rome is not an attractive alternative” for many Christians in Britain.

In 1990 the Catholic Church joined Churches Together in Britain and Ireland.

The new ecumenical group replaced the British Council of Churches (BCC), set up in 1942.

The Catholic Church had never been a member of the BCC, although Catholics had worked with local BCC associations ever since the 1960s.

Theological dialogue with Anglicans began in 1967 and continued with the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission over the following three decades.

Progress has slowed in recent years after the ordination of women and gay men as Anglican bishops.

The ComRes poll was conducted online between June 30 and July 6. Data was weighted by denomination – Anglican, Baptist, Independent, Methodist, New Churches, Pentecostal and Catholic – according to the 2005 Church census.

Multiple sclerosis patient succeeds in arguing that it is a breach of her human rights not to know whether her husband Omar Puente will be prosecuted if he accompanies her to Swiss clinic Dignitas

Debbie Purdy has won a significant legal victory in the House of Lords which lawyers are describing as a turning point for the law on assisted suicide.

Purdy, 46, from Bradford, West Yorkshire, who has primary progressive multiple sclerosis, succeeded in arguing that it is a breach of her human rights not to know whether her husband, Cuban jazz violinist Omar Puente, will be prosecuted if he accompanies her to Swiss clinic Dignitas where she wishes to die if her condition worsens.

The decision – the last ever by the law lords before they recommence work as justices of the new supreme court in October – went further than expected in Purdy’s favour, lawyers say.

Ordering the director of public prosecutions to issue a policy setting out when those in Puente’s position can expect to face prosecution, the court ruled that the current lack of clarity is a violation of the right to a private and family life.

“It’s a complete victory,” said Saimo Chahal, partner at Bindmans who represented Purdy. “I always knew we would have to go to the House of Lords to get a judgment that was reasoned and considered”.

Purdy’s two previous attempts to request a policy from prosecutors failed after the courts said the current situation was lawful.

Despite at least 115 British people already known to have travelled abroad for an assisted suicide, with an average of two a month since 2002 and despite scores of police investigations, not a single family member has been prosecuted.

A report last month from campaign group Dignity in Dying, which has supported Purdy’s case, warned that a further 34 Britons were in the final stages of travelling abroad for the same purpose.

Earlier this month renowned British conductor Sir Edward Downes, 85, and his wife Joan, 74, joined those who have ended their lives at Dignitas.

Their death, watched by their children Caractacus, 41, and Boudicca, 39, is still the subject of a police investigation.

In a further development last year, DPP Keir Starmer published a decision not to prosecute the relatives of 23-year old rugby player Daniel James even though there was enough evidence, because it was not in the public interest.

Campaigners welcome today’s victory for Purdy of a recognition of rights for those who wish to die in a manner of their choosing, and say that what is ultimately needed is a change in the law.

Parliament urgently needs to acknowledge the fact that people are travelling overseas to die – and this trend shows no sign of stopping”, said Sarah Wootton, chief executive of Dignity in Dying.

“It’s time the 1961 Suicide Act was brought up to date to reflect what’s really going on in UK courts”.

Parliament has so far resisted attempts to change the law, with the latest proposals defeated in the House of Lords by 194 votes to 141 earlier this month. But campaigners say that today’s ruling will place unprecedented pressure on parliament to act.

“This case means the DPP will have to publish the factors for and against prosecuting those who assist suicide abroad, but it would only be retrospective”, Wootton said. “But it sends a clear message that the law can distinguish between different types of behaviour, and saying that compassionate assistance is not a crime. Surely parliament will need to react to that”.

Premier

The Law Lords will decide whether Euthanasia laws need clarifying later.

MS Sufferer, Debbie Purdy, is back in court asking whether her husband will be prosecuted if he travels with her to die in Dignitas clinic in Switzerland.

The 45 year-old lost a judicial review last October on the issue and today’s judgment, by a panel of five senior Law Lords, will be a vital moment for campaigners for assisted suicide.

Ms Purdy has suggested that she may travel to Switzerland to take a lethal dose of barbiturates prescribed by doctors at the controversial Dignitas organisation.

She wants her husband, Omar Puente, to be at her side when she dies and wants to be confident he will not be arrested upon his return. He could potentially face 14 years in prison.

More than 100 UK citizens have so far ended their lives at Dignitas, and no one who has accompanied them has ever been prosecuted on their return to the UK.

Anthony Ozimic, from Christian pro-life group SPUC which is taking part in the case today, said the campaign for legalising assisted suicide has been running for many years. He said:

“The voluntary Euthanasia society, who have now repackaged themselves as Dignity in Dying are now trying many different ways to get assisted suicide and voluntary Euthanasia legalised in Britain.

“They failed recently in the House of Lords; an amendment to allow greater scope for assisted suicide was rejected. They failed in the British Medical association at their annual meeting. They have been continuing for many years a court campaign to try to undermine the right to life.”

Mary Corrigan is a Christian who also suffers with MS. She says she’s concerned of the knock on effect if Ms Purdy’s appeal is successful. She said:

“For people who have little love in their life and who know that they are disabled and feel suicidal, unscrupulous family will pressure them to go and put an end to it. I think it’s very dangerous.”

If Ms Purdy is not successful today, her only option will be to take her case to the European Court of Human Rights. Ms Purdy was diagnosed with primary progressive MS in March 1995. She can no longer walk and is gradually losing strength in her upper body.

Click here for the full report from the Jubilee Centre:-

Secularism Poses Threat to Democracy

Christian Today

Democracy under threat from secularism, report warns

In the report ‘Sustaining Democracy’, the Christian think tank warns that secularism is jeopardising civil liberties and human rights, and claiming the privileges of religious judgement for itself to the exclusion of other religions.

“Democracies cannot shake off their Christian past without shaking off the liberties which flowed from it,” warns the report’s author Dr Philip Sampson, mediator, family court adviser and research fellow.

He criticised the tendency of some secularists to disregard religious views as “ill-considered” and “prejudiced”.

“Where would this have left the abolitionists or the civil rights movement?” he said.

Dr Sampson warned that secularism had responded to the “perceived vulnerability of democracy to global forces” by seeking to identify and eliminate evil, as seen in the war on terror, and by reasserting secular liberalism. Both strategies, he said, had failed.

“If the secular world continues to ignore Christian scholarship then Western democratic institutions will be further denied access to the resources necessary for renewal,” Dr Sampson cautioned.

“We will be left merely with modernist materialism, what Europe’s most distinguished living philosopher calls ‘postmodern chatter’, or moralistic fundamentalism (whether Liberal, Christian or Islamic).”

Dr Sampson went on to argue for the disestablishment of a secular religion and the opening of the public sphere to a prophetic Christian understanding of tolerance towards all religions, including secularism.

It was only a matter of time

South Manchester Reporter

Bishop’s ‘insane’ advice over swine flu

Amy Gglendinning
July 30, 2009

Dinesh D’Souza – Christianity Today

Political scientist Samuel Huntington depicted a clash of civilizations between the West and the House of Islam in his controversial book The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, which received new life after 9/11. Huntington and his admirers portrayed Muslim countries as incorrigibly illiberal and anti-Western, a view that has spread beyond the academy.

A major theme of the New Atheism is that fanaticism is intrinsic not only to Islam but to all of the Abrahamic religions. Sam Harris, author of The End of Faith, writes that “we are not at war with terrorism, we are at war with Islam.” And in her book Infidel, Ayaan Hirsi Ali argues that only by turning against Islam and embracing Western secularism can Muslims—especially Muslim women—discover the blessings of freedom.

Certainly one could find anecdotal evidence (such as honor killings or Islamic groups cheering terrorist attacks) to argue that Muslims are enemies of modernity, liberalism, and freedom. But are these horror stories representative?

A wealth of data presents a different picture. Much of this data is summarized in John Esposito and Dalia Mogahed’s Who Speaks for Islam?: What a Billion Muslims Really Think (see “Islam According to Gallup,” CT, Nov. 2008, page 38).

Surveys of the world’s Muslims find that most Muslims support democracy and freedom. Indeed, many Muslims complain that they are ruled by Western-supported secular despots who deny people their right to self-government. Most Muslims also support scientific advancements and seek more prosperity through free markets and global trade. However one reads the Qur’an or the historical record of Islam, no one familiar with this data can call contemporary Muslims enemies of modernity.

At the same time, there are some anomalies. Esposito and Mogahed’s analysis shows that Muslims fear that “Islam is under attack” and that the West is leading that attack. In addition, while most Muslims don’t support theocracy, they do want religion to have an important role in shaping their private and public lives. Even Shari’ah, with its draconian provisions against theft and adultery, enjoys wide support among Muslims, at least in the domestic sphere.

To understand these seemingly contradictory currents, it’s helpful to distinguish between two types of liberalism. One is the classical liberalism of the American founding. Call this Liberalism 1, which is reflected in such principles as the right to vote, to assemble freely, to trade with others and keep the fruits of one’s labor, to practice one’s religion, to tolerate different political and religious views, and so on.

Then there is the modern liberalism that developed in the West after World War II. Call this Liberalism 2, which is characterized by the right to blaspheme, pornography as a protected form of free expression, the exclusion of religious symbols from the public square, the right of teenagers to receive sex education and contraceptives, the right to abortion, prostitution as a worker’s right, and so on.

The data show that the vast majority of Muslims support Liberalism 1 while rejecting Liberalism 2. From Jakarta to Jeddah, from Islamabad to Istanbul, Muslims are deeply concerned that, through U.S. military force, economic pressures, and the global spread of American popular culture, the values of Liberalism 2 are being imposed on the Muslim world.

The implications are profound. First, we can better understand how radical Islam has widened its following. By portraying the West as atheistic and morally decadent, Islamic radicals can effectively recruit followers by appealing to a shared Muslim antipathy for permissive values. Moreover, the survey data show that nothing antagonizes Muslims, and presumably makes them vulnerable to radical recruitment, more than Western attacks on Islam as a religion of violence.

Second, the West would do well to show Muslims its more traditional face. Currently Muslims see America mostly through the lens of popular culture. But the values of Hollywood are not typical of the way most U.S. citizens live. If Muslims could see more Americans who go to church, raise intact families, and espouse traditional moral values, they would be less vulnerable to the propaganda of radical Islam.

Finally, mainstream Christians are well situated not only to understand Muslim sensibilities, but also to work with the followers of Islam in combating the excesses of Liberalism 2. After all, Muslims’ concerns about some of the excesses of American culture are widely shared among Christians. And, through our efforts at evangelism and dialogue, as well as pressuring our government to use diplomacy and media, we should highlight Christian values and traditional moral values around the world, especially in the Muslim world. In doing so, we can share the gospel while promoting mutual understanding, weakening Islamic terrorism, and making our own society safer.

Albert Mohler

Now facing its third millennium, the Christian church faces a moment of great historical importance and opportunity. The modern missionary movement is now over two centuries old. Looking back over those years, it is clear that God mobilized His people to make great strides in taking the gospel to many parts of the world.

This missionary movement has seen the evangelization of millions of persons representing thousands of ethnic and cultural groups. The Bible has been translated into hundreds of languages and dialects. Over the last several decades, new areas of the world have shown a remarkable response to the gospel, and the continent of Africa may now be the center of the world missionary enterprise. In fact, the last half of the twentieth century saw an enormous evangelistic response throughout the Pacific Rim and the African continent.

Today, the Christian church faces new challenges. Without exaggeration, we can point to the twenty-first century as a new era in Christian missions, and recognize it as a vast new opportunity.

Looking at Christian missions today, we may be seeing the birth of a new missiological movement. This new era in missions will build upon the accomplishments of the last 200 years, but it must also be adapted to the new realities of our world context.

The most important dimension of any vision for world missions is a passion to glorify God. From beginning to end, the Bible declares that God is glorifying Himself in the salvation of sinners, and that He desires to be worshipped among all the peoples of the earth. The impulse of the missionary conviction is drawn from the assurance that God saves sinners, and that He is glorifying Himself by creating a new people through the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, we have the glad opportunity to glorify God by declaring the Gospel to all the peoples of the earth.

As John Piper has stated, “The deepest reason why our passion for God should fuel missions is that God’s passion for God fuels missions. Missions is the overflow of our delight in God because missions is the overflow of God’s delight in being God.” In missions, we share God’s delight.

Pioneers such as William Carey gave birth to the modern missionary movement. It was Carey’s sense of evangelistic passion, set upon a clear foundation of biblical truth and confidence in the gospel, that compelled him to leave the safe confines of England and go to India. The full harvest of William Carey’s ministry will be known only in eternity. Most Christians are aware that he served for many years without a single convert. When many missionaries would have returned home or moved to greener pastures, Carey stayed and invested himself in India. He translated the New Testament and built bridges to the people of that great nation.

Since Carey’s time, thousands of missionaries have left homes and families to take the gospel to the remotest parts of the earth. Reviewing the history of the missionary movement, it is clear that great gains were made for the gospel. At the same time, every generation has left its own imprint on the missionary task, and each generation is blind to some of the cultural baggage it takes along with the gospel. At the height of the missions movement in the Victorian era, it often seemed that missionaries were just as intent on Westernizing native peoples as in evangelizing them. A new awareness of the global context and respect for native cultures should lead us to be careful to preach the gospel rather than Western culture.

The new vision for world missions is directed toward the reaching of people groups rather than nations. Missiological focus upon the nation-state is a remnant of the nineteenth century, when nations were conceived as singular units and national identity was paramount. This paradigm was long out of date by the end of the twentieth century. Christians now recognize that there are thousands of distinct people groups, each identifiable by culture, language, and social structure–and they are not always divided neatly by political boundaries. Each of these people groups represents a distinct missiological challenge, and each must be considered in its own right.

While it is likely that churches and denominational gatherings will continue to celebrate a parade of the flags of the nations, the reality is that each of those nations includes a collective of various people groups desperately in need of the gospel–people groups often dispersed throughout the globe.

This should bring a new humility as well as growing urgency to the church. So long as we were able to count nation-states in terms of missionary saturation, we could see a tremendous advance and what seemed to be a constant march of progress. When people groups are taken into consideration, however, we can clearly see that the greater challenge still lies before us. This means that the Christian church must develop cultural understanding and sensitivity, as well as linguistic and cultural dexterity, in the task of preaching the gospel to unreached persons.

This new vision for world missions is also remarkable in the fact that much, if not most, of the energy is coming from grassroots Christians rather than from institutional structures. Perhaps the greatest missionary advance among American churches is seen in the widespread participation of Christian laypersons in missionary trips and short-term mission projects. Churches that encourage and support this hands-on approach to missions will bear testimony to the powerful impact it has upon the participants and upon the missionary commitment of the entire congregation.

Today’s Christians are looking for an experiential participation in the missionary challenge. They draw great excitement in hearing from missionaries, but even greater commitment by being participants in the missionary movement themselves. Because of this, this new vision is also congregational in its focus. Individual congregations are taking up the missionary challenge, and measuring their own faithfulness by the number of missionaries sent around the world from among their own members.

Much of this new vision is flowing out of reports from the 10/40 window–that portion of the world between latitudes 10 and 40 degrees, where most of the world’s unreached peoples live. This focus on the Great Commission has led to a mobilization mentality that holds great promise for the future of the Christian church.

One missionary leader has defined this mobilization as “all of God’s people reaching all the peoples of the earth.” That motto sets the issue clearly. This generation must be committed to see all of God’s people together reaching all the peoples of the earth without regard to race, culture, economic reality, or geographical or political obstacles.

Over the past half-century, America has seen several generational transitions. As the new millennium dawns, the Baby Boom generation is now in mid-adulthood, and some are heading toward retirement. The GI generation that built so many of the great institutions and provided leadership in our denomination and churches is now reaching advanced years, though many in this generation continue to be active participants and well-known leaders. Behind the Baby Boomers are coming “Generation X,” the “Busters,” and the “Millennials.” How will these generations mold the missionary movement of the future?

This generation demonstrates a readiness to take on new challenges and to go where no previous generation has yet taken the gospel. They have been born into a culturally diverse world, and they are gifted with skills in intercultural communication. They are impatient with the cultural isolationism of previous generations. They see no political boundaries to the Gospel. They are ready to cross political borders and see no limitations on the Great Commission. Where previous generations wanted to support missions, this generation is determined to do missions. Incubated in an experience-driven culture, these young Christians are not interested in missions by proxy.

This new generation holds great promise, but it also demands urgent attention. The church needs to mobilize the energy of these younger Christians and deploy their gifts in cultural translation and adaptation. Nevertheless, this generation has inherited a dwindling deposit of doctrinal and theological understanding. Our churches and seminaries must quickly be about the business of grounding this generation in biblical truth, even as they are mobilizing for world missions.

In all likelihood, these new generations will establish a missiological pattern of long duration. We may well see a tidal wave of participatory missions unlike anything seen by the Christian church since the first century. Finally, it is up to the church both to release their energy and to ground their convictions.

Our vision for world evangelization is an important barometer of spiritual and theological health. A vibrant commitment to Christ leads to a passion for the Gospel. A grand embrace of God’s truth produces an enthusiasm to see God glorified as His name is proclaimed to the nations. It is time for a new generation to lead–and to point the way.

Anglican Mainstream

Chris Sugden – Evangelicals Now – August 2009

So said Vinay Samuel after the launch of the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans in UK and Ireland at Westminster Central Hall on Monday July 6th.  1600 people from 400 parishes attended. The basis was the Jerusalem Declaration from the Global Anglican Future Conference, Jerusalem in June 2008.

The Church of England will not be the same again because the meeting brought into the open through video ( including an interview with Dr James Packer, and available for £1.50 from Anglican Mainstream below) and live interviews what many have been experiencing in the Church of England for years: the growth of secular humanism within the Church of England; unfair discrimination in selection, training and ordaining of ministers; the official restraints on church planting in a world that has long since burst through geographical boundaries of the parish. It was real world Anglicanism.

Strong energy and activity resides in fast growing churches, to grow themselves and to plant churches in other areas. They are mission driven.

Often the idea that an expression of Christian faith is confined to the parish is a real constraint.  Pagan Britain is a vast mission field, and people are highly mobile.

Because of the impact of their mission activity, these churches produce many excellent candidates for ministry.  They believe they have the resources to train them and funds to deploy them.

These churches are seeking release from unnecessary constraints on their mission vision and activity.  The concern of  such “churches on the edge” is a mission concern, not a concern for autonomy or unaccountability. Their request for oversight is itself a request for accountability.

Dr Chik Kaw Tan of Malaysia said that “ History will show that yesterday was a landmark in the fightback in Britain (and worldwide) against the liberal and secular tide threatening to overwhelm the country.”

Peter Jensen was clear: “The FCA exists to keep Anglicanism united, to enable those whose spiritual existence as Anglicans is threatened to remain Anglicans with integrity.”

“It exists to keep orthodox, biblical Anglicanism inside the fold at the highest level possible; to gather up the fragments, to unite them.  It exists so that evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics and mere Anglicans can continue to be Anglicans without compromising Biblical truth.   The question for you is: will you join us, will you help us keep our Communion one, holy, catholic and apostolic.”

Very warm applause was given to Archbishop Bob Duncan, the newly installed archbishop of the Anglican Church in North America. The gathering was ecumenical – bishops and senior leaders were present from the Christian Brethren, the Fellowship of Independent Evangelical Churches, the Church of Scotland, the Free Church of England, and the Church of England in South Africa.

Lord Carey of Clifton sent the following message

“You are already facing suspicion and hostility from various quarters because of the launch of FCA in England. Nevertheless, attempt to build the strongest bonds of communion with the rest of the Anglican family.”

Charismatic Anglicans were represented.  Fifteen of those giving input were charismatic – plus the stewarding and technical teams.  John Coles, the director of New Wine, in his New Wine newsletter, said:

“It’s important for us to show solidarity with orthodox and persecuted Anglicans in North America; to show that there is a strong group of orthodox Anglicans in the Church of England; and to stand together against the slow but steady conforming influence of secular humanism within the Church of England.”

Speakers brought vision and concerns from the anglo-catholic , charismatic and evangelical traditions. Everyone liked something and was offended by something. It is only the start of a journey in mutual understanding.  When a ship is launched, much remains to be done before it puts to sea.

I love this:-

There are still a few days left so make sure you enter the Christian Blog Awards