Theo Hobson in The Guardian writes about A new recipe for Christianity. Pete Rollins, frustrated with institutional Christianity, has used poetry, song and performance art to rethink religion.
Andrew Brown in The Guardian asks Is Henry VIII in hell? Rowan Williams wonders whether Henry VIII is in hell now, and talks about the Christian reaction to the triumphs of tyranny.
Christopher Howse asks a similar question in the Telegraph: Has Rowan Williams damned Henry VIII to hell? King Henry VIII might be in hell, the Archbishop of Canterbury suggested the other day in a sermon.
Giles Fraser writes in the Church times about Teasing out the morality of coalition.
Diarmaid MacCulloch writes in The Guardian Vatican II: Benedict rewrites history. At a speech in Portugal Pope Benedict gave us a rare insight into his feelings about the second Vatican council.
Graham Kings has written this Pentecost article for the Times: Picturing the Spirit. [also online at Fulcrum]
Rebecca Paveley writes in the Times that The bishops won’t go quietly in the struggle over Lords’ reform. The campaign for a fully elected Upper House would mean an end to their presence. So is Parliament still accountable to God or have clergymen in politics become an anachronism?
This week’s The Question at The Guardian’s Comment is free Belief is Who can claim Newman? Cardinal Newman was the greatest English Catholic of the Victorian age. But whose side would he be on today?
Here are the responses.
Monday: Hugh O’Shaughnessy An example for reform. Newman said ‘To live is to change’. A timely reminder to those churchmen who love power and the status quo.
Tuesday: Luke Coppen Newman’s universal message. Gandhi’s love of Newman’s hymn ‘Lead, kindly Light’ proves that the cardinal is not just for Catholics.
Thursday: Martin Pendergast Newman’s democratic church. Newman’s legacy is an inclusive, diverse church, with a theology rooted in the practices of the community.
Friday: Francis Davis A distracting debate. Catholics often fight their present battles using scripts from the past. But this pretence is a waste of time.
The link to Diarmaid MacCulloch’s piece is set up as an e-mail link as opposed to a hyperlink.
The bad link, and another similar one, have been corrected.
Make no mistake about Joe Ratzinger and his views on Vatican II. He, like his predecessor set the clock back to the imperial days of triumphalism prior to the Council. Ratzinger has especially revived the imperial attire worn by popes prior to the council and his reinstatement of the Tridentine Mass has locked in his backward thinking and wounded the Church in profound ways. John Paul II and Benedict will go down in history as men who were afraid of reforms and this has set the Latin Rite Church back about five centuries. Hans Kung is the kind of man… Read more »
“Is Henry VIII in hell?”
Either ALL the monarchs of the period (inc. the Bishops of Rome) are, or none of them are. [As Anglican universalist, I vote the latter]
“Make no mistake about Joe Ratzinger and his views on Vatican II. He, like his predecessor set the clock back to the imperial days of triumphalism prior to the Council.” Can anyone tell me in what respect Benedict has denied any teaching of Vatican II? I mean, of course, something the Council actually taught? You can look at all of the concilar documents here, if it helps: http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/index.htm I would appreciate it. “Hans Kung is the kind of man the Church of Rome needs in the chair of Peter. He would move the Church forward in the true spirit of… Read more »
Theo Hobson is not reporting on A new recipe for Christianity: it is an old recipe of long standing, on the one hand in the Quakers and the other the Unitarians.
I don’t know much about the Quakers and even less about Unitarians but my impression is that they have overcome the problems of “identity politics”: when you are with or amongst Quakers, you get the feeling that you are there, and your individual personality is acknowledged – it is sufficient unto itself and needs no supporting justification. With Anglicanism, people’s personalities are being caught up in quasi-doctrinal identities: male, female, heterosexual, homosexual, heterodox, orthodox, traditionalist, radical, High Church, Low Church, etc., etc., and it’s the identity that people get all worked up about, not the person.
“Even so, coalitions raise fascinating questions about morality. Those who come together for some greater good — such as the national interest — are asked to swallow many of their principles in order to achieve that good. This is a real problem for those who think of morality as the having of strong and clear principles and sticking to them through thick and thin.” – Giles Fraser – Intentionally or not, Fr. Giles’ identifies one of the problems for ACNA – the amalgam of different codes of churchmanship, and views on women’s ministry that are contained within that North American… Read more »
That’s right. The bias is on individualism and towards optimism (against original sin) and that does lead to person first. It does not remove categories, and arguments about directions, but it does point out first that individuals who might be of this collective ‘party’ or that usually don’t fit in that well when you actually listen.
That King created a hell on earth for individuals and society – esp his wives and the religous orders.
But in C21st what on earth does it mean to ask if he is ‘ in Hell now’?
Has Williams taken leave of his senses completely ?
“”Is Henry VIII in hell?”
Either ALL the monarchs of the period (inc. the Bishops of Rome) are, or none of them are. [As Anglican universalist, I vote the latter]”
As usual JCF is right on. What the dear Archbishop of Canterbury seems to forget is that we are saved by God’s mercy and grace, not by someone (however saintly) praying us out of hell or purgatory. Yes, tyrants may create hell for the world and themselves in their time, but the final victory always belongs to God.