I have got quite fed up with the way that 2025 is being described as the 1700th anniversary of the Nicene Creed. It isn’t. It is the 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea which produced a credal-like statement which was the basis for the work done at the Council of Constantinople in 381 to produce what we refer to today as the Nicene Creed. Does this matter? I think it does. Apart from anything else being historically accurate in relation to this issue helps us to realise that Creeds didn’t drop down ready made from heaven and the process… Read more »
Evan McWilliams
6 hours ago
I notice the most recent work referenced by Revd Clatworthy is from 1991, when I was 5 years old. I’m not convinced being force-fed a diet of ‘Jesus the ethical teacher, Jesus the man in tune with the divine’ (with a dash of Bultmannian demythologising for flavour) for the past 70+ years has been at all good for the Church and I’m personally extremely grateful to Constantine for giving the Church opportunity to clarify who Jesus really was- the divine second person of the Trinity who died ‘for us and for our salvation’.
*I missed the 2001 reference in the footnotes. Mea culpa.
Nigel Goodwin
5 hours ago
Re Charlie Bell. He says “They don’t actually want pop-concert-church, or whatever faddy nonsense is the most recent recipient of the magical money pot that will surely solve all our problems.”
It’s a shame he uses this as a primary example of views. Maybe a bias in his sample? Reactionary is certainly a word I would use for those who dislike a variety in styles of worship.
I won’t write an essay, but I think he exposed a flaw in his own thinking.
On the contrary. The pop-concert is not specifically Anglican and usually conveys the most reactionary views despite trying to be ‘trendy ‘. Dr Bell is right to describe today’s CofE as faddy nonsense.
Lorenzo Fernandez-Smal
5 hours ago
It is a sobering thought that, as a result of the promulgation of the Nicene Creed, more Christians were murdered by other Christians than ever were by arch-villains like Nero or Caligula. Let’s stop saying this. Which orthodoxy really, there are so many now.
William
3 hours ago
I find Charlie Bell’s piece fascinating. I come from a viewpoint that is polar opposite to his own but I think he is right. The traditional terminology just doesn’t work any more. Those who are fighting for traditionally conservative values are up against the entire establishment. People like this increasingly see themselves as radicals rather than conservatives. And those who pursue a progressive agenda are often in tune with most public institutions. Once gay pride was embraced by Highstreet banks it lost something of its revolutionary appeal and became boringly mainstream. So if a change of ‘vocab’ is what you… Read more »
I have got quite fed up with the way that 2025 is being described as the 1700th anniversary of the Nicene Creed. It isn’t. It is the 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea which produced a credal-like statement which was the basis for the work done at the Council of Constantinople in 381 to produce what we refer to today as the Nicene Creed. Does this matter? I think it does. Apart from anything else being historically accurate in relation to this issue helps us to realise that Creeds didn’t drop down ready made from heaven and the process… Read more »
I notice the most recent work referenced by Revd Clatworthy is from 1991, when I was 5 years old. I’m not convinced being force-fed a diet of ‘Jesus the ethical teacher, Jesus the man in tune with the divine’ (with a dash of Bultmannian demythologising for flavour) for the past 70+ years has been at all good for the Church and I’m personally extremely grateful to Constantine for giving the Church opportunity to clarify who Jesus really was- the divine second person of the Trinity who died ‘for us and for our salvation’.
*I missed the 2001 reference in the footnotes. Mea culpa.
Re Charlie Bell. He says “They don’t actually want pop-concert-church, or whatever faddy nonsense is the most recent recipient of the magical money pot that will surely solve all our problems.”
It’s a shame he uses this as a primary example of views. Maybe a bias in his sample? Reactionary is certainly a word I would use for those who dislike a variety in styles of worship.
I won’t write an essay, but I think he exposed a flaw in his own thinking.
It’s called building an inter-sectional bridge, but without biblical foundations
it doesn’t stand up.
On the contrary. The pop-concert is not specifically Anglican and usually conveys the most reactionary views despite trying to be ‘trendy ‘. Dr Bell is right to describe today’s CofE as faddy nonsense.
It is a sobering thought that, as a result of the promulgation of the Nicene Creed, more Christians were murdered by other Christians than ever were by arch-villains like Nero or Caligula. Let’s stop saying this. Which orthodoxy really, there are so many now.
I find Charlie Bell’s piece fascinating. I come from a viewpoint that is polar opposite to his own but I think he is right. The traditional terminology just doesn’t work any more. Those who are fighting for traditionally conservative values are up against the entire establishment. People like this increasingly see themselves as radicals rather than conservatives. And those who pursue a progressive agenda are often in tune with most public institutions. Once gay pride was embraced by Highstreet banks it lost something of its revolutionary appeal and became boringly mainstream. So if a change of ‘vocab’ is what you… Read more »