The following blog post has been highlighted by a variety of people: Nick Baines Blog. This blog is are response to an article in the Independent challeninging the Archbishop of Canterbury's involvement in politics. The responses Baines makes to the article are very good. I would, however, want to add a couple of comments:
First of all I think that the issue of the established nature of the Church of England is an important question in relation to this article and would support the disestablishment of the Church of England just as I don't think the Kirk should have 'national' Church status in Scotland.
Secondly, and following on from the above there is a danger that the responses to the article are based upon the implicit assumption that the Church should have a 'recognised' public voice. Recognised by whom? I think that the Church should have a public voice that speaks out and into the reality of society seeking the transformation of structures and the humanisation of ills. Yet, to do that it does not need to argue its 'right' to do so. Indeed to argue for its right to do so assumes that there exists outside of the Church validating criteria and a legitimazing authority which agrees this 'right'. The Church does not need to have anyone to agree to its having a public voice to have one, it just needs to act and speak publicly deriving its authority from the authority of Christ. Methinks (playful old language) that those who have been prophets have not always argued for their right to be prophets against those who denied them that they right - they have just got on with it and lived with the consequences for the sake of a greater reward...to paraphrase something from Hebrews 11.
Recent Comments