There’s a new Code for Safer Working Practice for theCofE which, I think, all church bodies and church officers must sign up to. Some of this is essential, some long overdue, some rather worrying. Not least this sudden & undiscussed ban on parish parties.
Indeed, my reading of this document would ban priests from going to the pub if there are children there. I haven’t seen this discussed anywhere but if they are going to implement such a drastic imposition on clergy & parishes, this needs proper debate & scrutiny.
Platinum jubilee party? Dry.
Invited round for dinner by members of the PCC who have children? No wine.
Pub group with the young adults? Lemonade and lime.
This is a pastoral catastrophe.
Also this has a whole host of potentially awful consequences. 1) It’s a troublemaker’s charter; 2) It will make forming friendships very difficult; 3) It will make socially anxious people a million times more anxious; 4) The potential to make lonely priests far from home lonelier
Also, and remember this isn’t just about children & young people, this is about adults too. Now we’re banned from taking photos on our phones. Those same phones that we’re been told all *blanking* year we need to use to film our services. Could somebody sane revisit this please?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
My unpopular view of the day: people are welcome in the Church, to love their church, to yearn for prayer and worship to take place in their church, to seek sanctuary in their church during a pandemic... *even* if they haven’t come to the Annual Parochial Church Meeting.
I know how we all want people to be more engaged in their local churches, and @MirandaTHolmes is so often wonderful on this & on our concern for those marginalised from the church, but making the church into a private members club is the way to crash this.
When people who are not so involved with the church that they come to the Annual Parochial Church Meeting tell us their concerns, their hurt, their outrage, surely we should hear them not dismiss them for not being involved enough?
I remember the Berlin Wall falling so well. We had lived in Moscow until 1988 and to see the whole Eastern Bloc collapse was astonishing and exhilarating - the first real geopolitical event I even began to understand.
This rather poignant scene in the Royal Palace in Potsdam, which I saw yesterday, is a reminder of the brutal end of that brutal war which led to four decades of Communist dictatorship in Eastern Europe.
It strikes me that the government has two major, countervailing, hostile narratives to deal with: 1) a majority of the population that is still so jumpy it disapproves of any semblance of normalcy 2) a substantial minority that simply does not believe Covid to be a serious threat
To pursue the policy they have adopted they have simultaneously to reassure the first that it’s not so bad that the economy must be permanently crippled and the latter that it is bad enough to justify unprecedented restrictions in liberty, even including in wartime.
Regarding the substantial minority who doubt the lethal threat of Covid, has there been any attempt to explain why Covid seems to have morphed into a bad cold (triggering remarkably few hospitalisations & fewer deaths) & why the government thinks it will return with full vigour?
And today’s fun is Luther-fun! We’re in Wittenberg, the home of the Prince Electors of Saxony... the home of the Reformation.
Hier stehe ich!
And here we are. The thing that kicked it all off: an indulgence, being sold to fund the debts incurred by Albert as he sought to add the Archbishopric of Magdeburg to his already not unimpressive spiritual possession of Mainz. (Never seen an indulgence before. Impressive.)
Luther’s pulpit! A rather thin base for such an... unthin cleric.
Mass at Mainz Cathedral. The website was completely wrong, with some masses canceled and others replaced advertised Morning Prayer: to get in you needed to phone in advance to get a ticket, but no mention of this on the website. V distressed tourists at the door.
It was lucky I was with an RC priest, who had booked ahead to concelebrate, so they were able to slot my in as supernumerary (and were very friendly in the process), but it was a proper reminder of how websites & social media aren’t an optional extra but missionally vital.
Also, I’m quite glad I couldn’t understand the Bishop’s sermon as the only words I did get were “America First” & “Trump”. Whether pro or anti, I cannot imagine that the ethics of an American, no matter now might, was of immediate relevance to an elderly congregation on the Rhine
One of the more frustrating elements of the discourse around XR is that commentators insist on pretending that XR’s aim is to promote a public policy response to climate change. It’s not, their aim is the overthrow of representative democracy & capitalism - & they don’t hide it!
So it’s just frustrating to see commentators scratch their heads and say “this will undermine their cause and alienate the electorate”. They don’t care about the electorate, they explicitly want to bypass the electorate and representative democracy. Again: they don’t hide this.
Like a number of Marxist organisations that have recently risen to public prominence, they have latched onto genuine public concern and use it as a mask for a much more sinister agenda. We should see them for who they claim to be not who we think they should be.