FEFE versus Mission

This is one of a number of very recent pages, now the most recent of all. Like the others, it will be revised and extended.

First, background information about Lu Skerratt-Love, before I come to the bad mistakes she made whilst she was in Sheffield - which have had far-reaching effects. I give the evidence.

Above, St Mark's Church, Sheffield, where Lu Skerratt-Love was a member of the congregation, a Trustee of the Church and a member of the PCC (Parochial Church Council.)

The 2021 Accounts of St Mark's Church give the information that Lu Skerratt-Love was given money by the PCC:

A grant of £600 from the Stamper Bursary Fund was paid to Lu Skerratt Love to assist theological studies at Durham. This is third of 3 annual grants. Note the individual is a member of PCC but was not involved in discussions relating to this grant.'

I write about the Durham connection below. There's more about the subject in my page on the Durham Diocese. My page on the Durham Diocese also includes material on the Bishop of Liverpool, John Perumbalath, shown below, with the Liverpool Diocese Coat of Arms.

Lu Skerratt-Love is now the Revd Lu Skerratt-Love. She was ordained at Liverpool Cathedral by John Perumbalath and is now a Curate in the Liverpool Diocese, at the Team Parish of St Luke in the City, Liverpool.

Like St Mark's, Sheffield, St Luke in the City likes to be thoght of as a 'liberal' church - not just liberal but 'progressive.' In a Church Notice, St Mark's announced the event,

'Lu is getting ordained at Liverpool Cathedral on 22 June at 3pm. People are welcome to attend the ordination service and there will be a party afterwards at St Bride's church (just a few hundred meters from the cathedral). Please could you let Lu know if you would like to attend.'

https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=933733462127470&id=
100064724737003

The Bishop of Sheffield is delighted to announce that, following a thorough appointment process, the Revd Dr Beth Keith has been appointed Vicar of the Benefice of St Mark Broomhill and Priest-in-Charge of the Benefice of St Mary Walkley and Oversight Minister of the three Spires Mission Area.

From a St Mark's Facebook page which gives reactions to the news that Dr Beth Keith, Liberal Theologian at St Mark's, had been appointed Vicar of the church.

https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=933733462127470&id=
100064724737003&_rdr

So far, in all my coverage of Lu Skerratt-Love - extensive - I've hardly ever mentioned something she'd regard as central - her commitment to the Trans cause. This information is new, then.

This is from the page

https://stbridesliverpool.org.uk/whats-new/2024/6/10/announcing-our-new-curate-lu-skerratt-love

Announcing our new Curate
Lu Skerratt-Love

We are delighted to announce our new Curate Lu (they/them) who will join the Team Parish of St Luke's in June. Read Lu's introduction:

My name is Lu and I’ve been training for the priesthood at the Queen’s Foundation in Birmingham for the last two years. I’m delighted to be moving to Liverpool to become your curate in the St Luke’s in the City team.

I have a background in feminist and queer liberation theologies and am passionate about ecumenism and social justice, especially when it involves food! ... In my spare time, I enjoy swimming, board games and holy mischief making!

When she was based in Sheffield, Lu Skerratt-Love seems to have done a lot of mischief making - bit it wasn't mischief making of the 'holy' kind.

The page

https://opentable.lgbt/our-blog/2024/7/31/be-heard-a-reflection-for-pride-in-liverpool

includes a photograph of Lu Skerratt-Love preaching in Liverpool Cathedral, and this:

'Revd Lu Skerrat-Love, ordained at the city’s cathedral in June to serve the parish which hosts the first Open Table community, offered this reflection inspired by the readings: 1 Kings 19:11-13 and Luke 19:28-40.'

Recommended: clicking on these two links. And, of course, reading Revd Lu Skerratt-Love's sermon. Do the passages have much to do with the theme of the sermon, or anything to do with the sermon?

The passage from St Luke's includes this:

As he was now approaching the path down from the Mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the disciples began to praise God joyfully with a loud voice for all the deeds of power that they had seen ... Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to him, ‘Teacher, order your disciples to stop.’ He answered, ‘I tell you, if these were silent, the stones would shout out.’

The shouting of the stones in Lu Skerratt-Love's sermon is about something very different:

My prayer this Pride weekend, is that we can all have the courage to not just listen, but to hear. To take seriously the voices in our community, especially our trans siblings, and trans women of colour in particular who are suffering, who are being ignored, sidelined and vilified.

May we ensure those experiencing continued marginalisation and discrimination are not just listened to but lifted up high above the parapet and heard. May we encourage our siblings to stand on our shoulders and raise their voices high so even the stones of our government buildings want to shout aloud for trans rights!

Lu Skerratt-Love needs to be reminded that government buildings serve the people of this country, they serve people who are very, very varied. Only a very small percentage are Trans people, convinced or yet to be convinced of the supreme importance of Trans rights in the life of their communities and their country.

' ... so even the stones of our government buildings want to shout aloud for trans rights!' is frankly a ridiculous claim.

She also says that

' ... we can only live as people of faith, hope, and love, if we are also simultaneously called to be all God has created us to be, completely authentic, completely honest, completely ourselves. We are called to not just listen or be listened to, but to hear, and be heard for all that we have been, all that we are, and all we are yet to be. This is perhaps counter-cultural, but no less vital to our collective flourishing.'

She certainly has a flair for arranging resounding words on the page and speaking in resounding phrases, but her practice is very, very different, in my experience. She stresses the importance of 'hearing' but she seems not to listen to contrary views at any time. In fact, she feels a compulsion to suppress them. Anything which seems to interfere with her view of the world is an abomination, it seems.

The lives and work of people who grow the food she eats, produce the goods she uses, the responsibilities and demands of parenthood, almost all responsibilities and demands, perhaps, seem to be matters of indifference, well beyond her moral myopia.

She can't understand that there can be a conflict between the views of Trans people, Trans activists, and the views of very many women who object to use of women's falicities by biological males, the imprisonment of biological males in female prisons, and the never-ending attention-seeking of a section of the Trans community.

I doubt if she can give a direct answer to questions which concern her own speciality. Can she recognize the potential contradictions between Trans Ideology (the phrase I'd used, not in the least a phrase which she would ever use) and Christian doctrine (which I'd regard as a form of Christian ideology.)

Lu Skerratt Love: what do you believe happens to Trans people who never accept Jesus as Saviour? Do you have anything like a developed theology of 'Trans Redemption?' Surely, their destiny isn't different from the destiny of heterosexual people who never accept Jesus as Saviour: a form of separation from God, for people who believe in such things.

Of course, Lu Skerratt-Love is ridiculously selective in her use of Scripture, of 'Biblical evidence.'

She isn't in the least likely to make use of these Old Testament and New Testament examples of The Word of God:

'If a man lies with a man as one lies with woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.'

(Leviticus 20:13).

'God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.'

Romans 1:26-27

Before I quote the email sent to Lu Skerratt-Love, I provide a quotation from the Website of St Mark's Church. The Website includes this:

'Lu Skerrat-Love writes:

'On 7 October, XR [Extinction Rebellion] launched its largest worldwide action. In London thousands of rebels joined the rebellion for up to two weeks, spurred on by the need to act now for our climate before it is too late. Myself, and other members of St Mark's, are just some of those rebels. For us, XR speaks truth to power, where a strategy of non-violent disruptive civil disobedience is a way to make effective positive change in order to save this planet from human destruction. ‘My Christian faith felt central to the call from XR to ‘Act Now’, and I spent much of my time in London with Christian Climate Action (the Christian 'wing'), praying, taking part in actions, and doing the daily offices, including Eucharist in front of the police line.

Despite the noise, the clamour, the thousands of arrests [this was a gross exaggeration], the tears, the rain, the fear and the apprehension, it felt like a profoundly holy place. I was shoved, spat at by passers-by, threatened with a night in the cells but kept on, like so many others, joined in union and in partnership that though peaceful action profound change could be made. Christ was present in the mess of it all and with a collective hope (like fresh water) that we were once again renewed in God's call to us, to be stewards of God's creation... And it was good…’

'

Even an outline of my objections to the distortions and evasions and exaggerations of this account would take up far too much space to be included here.

Prayer as part of the solution to climate change. The idea that the Eucharist can play any part in combatting climate change. The idea that Christ was there. The grossly exaggerated view of the difficulties faced by the protesters. The whole conception is based on delusion and illusion, but I don't restrict myself to this outright rejection. I've addressed some of the misconceptions of people with views similar to those of Lu Skerratt-Love in my page Green Orthodoxy, Green Objections.

Yet again, there's ignorant indifference to the views of people who strongly objected to the protests, for very good reasons, including people with work to do, parents with children to care for.

If she thinks that the major problem of climate change and other environmental problems makes every other problem insignificant, she's mistaken, and badly mistaken. She obviously has no idea of the frequency of invasions in recorded history, the vast impact of invasions in relatively recent history - the vast impact on Poland and other European countries of the Nazi invasion of Poland and those other countries, the colossal consequences of the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union.

It seems obvious that she won't have devoted any thought at all to thinking about this issue - what would happen if this country were to be invaded in the future, if people in this country lost their freedom of action, if there were mass arrests and mass executions? One of the freedoms lost would obviously be the freedom to wave placards and lie on the road and to use other methods of protest.

LGBTQIA+ is an acronym that stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, intersex, and asexual or aromantic or agender. The plus sign (+) represents additional identities that are not included in the acronym. I take the view that use of this acronym, for anyone but the converted, people already belonging to this cluster, is ludicrous. I could say that it's ludicrous for anyone to use it, but I obviously wouldn't stop them from using it. Their freedoms would continue in my preferred version of reality. I'm not at all sure that my freedoms would continue in their preferred version.

A long time ago - let's fix the period as the immediate pre-war years and the war years, The Second World War, obviously - there was no mention of 'LGBTQIA+ I think it should be obvious that if these views had been very, very influential or dominant at that time, this country would never have decided to follow the heroic path which was followed, would never have offered effective resistance to Nazi Germany - and probably would have offered no resistance at all - and would have been conquered in no time.

The debate, such as it was, was conducted in tecms of 'homosexuality' and homosexuality was illegal, punishable by imprisonment. When the Church of England was a dominant force in society in this country, homosexuality could be punished by hanging. If Lu Skerratt-Love has any interest in history, I'd be quite surprised. She would do well to find out far more about what the Church she belongs to allowed to happen in past centuries - the punismments and vile treatment which the Church helped to enforce.

I wish that the heroic fight against Nazi Germany had been conducted by a nation where homosexuality was outlawed - and a notion which still made use of capital punishment. The Nazi regime was not just incomparably worse but belonged to a completely different category.

Lu Skerratt-Love should surely realize, has too restricted a view to realize, that the Trans people she associates with are privileged compared with the vast number of people who have lived and still live in conditions of acute deprivation. These people have been able, and are still able, to face their difficulties with a resilience and dignity which Trans activists seem unable to match.

Community Protection Notice: WRITTEN WARNING

The page Church Integrity provides more information about the issues.

From the WRITTEN WARNING issued to me by South Yorkshire Police on 15.02.2022

Pursuant to Section 43 Part 4 Chapter 1 (Community Protection Notices) Anti-social Behaviour Crime and Policing Act 2014.

' ... your conduct is having a detrimental effect of a persistent or continuing nature on the quality of life of those in the locality and the conduct is unreasonable.'

'If from this time and date, the conduct is still having a detrimental impact on the quality of life of those in the locality, you will be served a Community Protection Notice. It is a criminal offence not to comply with the Notice ... If found guilty you could be fined up to £2,500.'

This was the section 'Details of the Conduct' which accompanied the WRITTEN WARNING. I've detailed evidence to show conclusively that the section 'Details of the Conduct' is false and grossly unjust in every respect.

'The police have become aware of you contacting Lu Skerratt-Love via email and hand delivered letters. You have also been contacting her work colleagues via email and letter regarding her. In some of these correspondences you make mention of her personal faith. When you write these emails and letters it causes great upset to Lu and her colleagues at work. This is not fair and certainly not right to do so. It is important that you realise how much you are upsetting / distressing Lu with this conduct. You would not wish for such conduct for your loved ones. We are willing to help in anyway [sic].'

Lu Skerratt-Love was ordained at Liverpool Cathedral in June 2024 and is now Revd Lu Skerratt-Love, a Curate at the Team Parish of St Luke in the Liverpool Diocese.

I show that Lu Skerratt-Love never received any emails from me. A single person at the Church Army, Tim Ling, received a single email from me. Both received a letter from me. I give the content of the email and the letter, completely courteous. I contacted the Church Army to express concern about a proposed garden Church, for reasons to do with safety and security. Lu Skerratt-Love was involved in promoting the garden church. I made every effort to have removed a very large pile of hazardous rubbish which was on the land used by the Garden Church. The Community Protection Notice WRITTEN WARNING claims that I have harmed the neighbourhood. The facts are very different. The images in the first section of the Home Page include images of my gardening work in land near to this house, in the neighbourhood. This is enhancing the neighbourhood, not damaging it. I have never contributed to noise nuisance in the neighbourhood.

Issuing the Notice and Warning document to me was a waste of police time. Two police officers spent an hour at my house. At this time, my mother, who was 96 years old, had been very ill for a very long time. A few weeks after the document was issued, she died.

This is an issue which still hasn't been resolved. The complainant, Lu Skerratt-Love, was ordained at Liverpool Cathedral in June 2024 and is now a Curate, part of the Team Ministry of St Luke in the Liverpool Diocese.

'You would not wish for such conduct for your loved ones.' Any notion that I could have problems of my own was obviously not to be taken into account. I don't exaggerate the effect of their actions on me. I make every attempt to put my setbacks and difficulties in context, with awareness of the vastly greater difficulties other people can encounter. But at one point, I'd had enough. This wasn't the first time that South Yorkshire had contacted me to express their extreme disapproval. There were recorded incidents over a long period of time before I received the visitation.

On 11 March, 2022, I called at the City Centre Police Station of South Yorkshire Police without any clear objective, in a visit which wouldn't help to resolve the issues but which I simply felt compelled to make. The woman I spoke to did nothing to diminish the reputation of South Yorkshire Police, quite the opposite. She represented the strengths of the force, which are very great.

After leaving the Police Station, I went to visit my mother in hospital When I arrived at the hospital, I found that she had died a short time before. My brother had arrived just before me and my sister arrived soon after.

On this page, I give extracts from emails I sent at the time. There are a few extracts from emails I received. Here, 'SYP' is 'South Yorkshire Police.'

1. 16 February 2022 To a member of SYP

I have the utmost reluctance to cause any difficulties for the members of South Yorkshire Police who are instructed to carry out actions, the utmost reluctance to cause any difficulties for South Yorkshire Police as a whole. I've practically never complained about anything, in any sector, but this is a case which gives me every reason to complain. Lu Skerratt-Love, who made the complaint against me to South Yorkshire Police, seems not to show any restraint as a complainant. Your visit was the third time in six months that South Yorkshire Police have contacted me following a complaint from Lu Skerratt-Love and the second time that she has complained about alleged 'harassment by email.' I pointed out on the previous occasion that she has never received a single email from me and I have the conclusive evidence - that Tim Ling blocked all emails from me to members of the Church Army, the employers of Lu Skerratt-Love.

I'll mention the fact that the action of South Yorkshire Police which involved you and [name of police officer supplied in the email not given here] came a day after my mother was admitted to hospital. She's 96 years old and remains a patient on the Frailty Ward. My brother and sister and I may face the obvious prospect, a dark time for the family.

...

The 'Community Protection Notice - Written Warning' states that 'your conduct is having a detrimental effect, of a persistent or continuing nature on the quality of life of those in the locality and the conduct is unreasonable.' None of my neighbours, none of the people in the locality have made any complaints about me. The only complainant mentioned is Lu Skerratt-Love, who doesn't live in the locality, so far as I know. The allegation is an outrageous slur, a complete falsification. You've been inside my house and will have seen evidence that my pursuits are quiet ones - reading, study, listening to ... the Classical repertoire (never annoying the neighbours by playing them too loudly) and with an active concern for the neighbourhood, for example by my gardening and other work.

... the Notice was issued after taking 'evidence' from one person only, it seems, Lu Skerratt-Love. There was a complete failure to ask for my testimony before the drastic step of issuing the notice, with all the adverse consequences. If I'd been asked in advance, I could quickly and easily shown that Lu Skerratt-Love's allegations were preposterous.

2. 16 February 2022. To a member of SYP.

' ... an important aspect of this particular case: the difficulties when a Christian police officer, in this case Simon Kirkham, makes a decision in a case involving a Christian complainant, in this case Lu Skerratt-Love. To use against me the fact that I mention her 'personal faith' is very disturbing. Public bodies, including the police, MP's, Councillors and many others recognize that they have to face scrutiny, reasonable criticism when justified. Without scrutiny, it's more likely that there will be stagnation, irregularities, a whole range of problems. Christians evangelize actively. For example, every household in Sheffield (or almost every household) received pro-Christian, pro-mission literature fairly recently, published and distributed by the Christian organization 'Arise!' South Yorkshire Police has absolutely no right to censor views which make adverse comment on aspects of Christianity. My approach is to provide very extensive documentation and evidence. I take the view that Sergeant Kirkham is fully entitled to his Christian views and to promote his Christian views but in this case, there's the need for someone at a higher level of seniority to consider some possible conflicts of interest in this case, when a Christian police officer considered courses of action when a Christian made complaints against a non-Christian, myself.

' ... the multiple complaints of Lu Skerratt-Love have involved so much waste of police time, time which could and should have been devoted to other matters.'

3.18 February 2022. To Sergeant Simon Kirkham of SYP

You may deny that you acted in a biased fashion, that your Christian beliefs were involved in any way, but I think it's unlikely that a non-Christian or anti-Christian police officer could write 'In some of these correspondences you make mention of her [Lu Skerratt-Love's] faith.' ... It isn't a hate crime to mention Christian faith - or perhaps you think it is. A completely separate matter, but again and again, no investigations have been begun against Christians suspected of abuse because it was supposed that their faith left them above suspicion - only for the discovery of gross abuse perpetrated by some of these people. It's essential that freedom of expression should be maintained - encouraged - so that there may be proper scrutiny of Christians and non-Christians. Freedom of expression - with obvious restrictions, such as in cases of terrorism and promotion of terrorism - should be regarded as a fundamental value of society.

I complained to Chief Inspector Ian Proffitt after the Harassment Warning and got nowhere. Ever since, I've found it impossible to overlook the injustice.

4. 15 February 2022. To Sergeant Simon Kirkham of SYP.

You seem not to have read the email I sent to you today at 16.04, or have not read it with nearly enough care. I asked for specific information. One of the police officers who called today wrote your name on the 'Community Police Protection Notice' but there's no indication on the document that you were the person who authorized the issuing of the notice. I made it clear that I needed certainty on this point before making a complaint (to the Professional Standards Department of South Yorkshire Police.)

Other issues: the Community Protection Notice was issued with only the testimony of Lu Skerratt-Love, You - or the person who issued the notice if it was not you - made no attempt to contact me to obtain my testimony. If I had been contacted, I could easily show, with evidence and documentation, that Lu Skerratt-Love has received no emails from me. Other evidence is provided on the Web page I cite in my earlier email to you. The notice takes for granted, without giving any evidence, that my conduct is allegedly 'having a detrimental effect, of a persistent and continuing nature on the quality of life of those in the locality.' This is a preposterous, in fact malicious accusation - I'm having no such effect. Lu Skerratt-Love, so far as I know, does not live in the neighbourhood. It is Lu Skerratt-Love who is harassing me. This is the third time she has contacted the police about me in connection with emails or my Website, when throughout, she must have known that due to the action of Tim Ling of the Church Army, all emails from me to her and other members of the Church Army were blocked. I don't know how much more conclusive could the evidence be that the accusations of Lu Skerratt-Love are without any basis.

One further matter. I have a policy, stated on the Home Page of the site, of not quoting emails in whole or in part without the permission of the sender. I think it would be very useful to quote your email to me. Unless I hear from you to the contrary, making it clear that you do not give permission, I'll use the content of your email f for subsidiary purposes in my submission to the Professional Standards Department.

I make it completely clear to you that it's out of the question for me to delete material from my Website as a result of police pressure. The police have no power to censor material of the kind found on my Website. Lu Skerratt-Love has no power to force me to delete material. We live, of course, in a liberal democracy, not a totalitarian state, or a state with very limited freedoms.

Please email me the information I require at your earliest convenience and then I can begin the work of writing my complaint to the Professional Standards Department.

1. 15 February 2022. From Sergeant Simon Kirkham of SYP to me.

I am the Team Sergeant for the area. If you require any further clarity about the notice you have been served please feel free to contact me. If you continue with any behaviour likely to cause harassment, alarm and distress I will consider further action. Please take the notice seriously and understand the negative impact that some of your actions may have had upon others. It’s completely in your power for this matter to stop now and no further action be necessary.

2.16 February 2022. From Sergeant Simon Kirkham to me.

I am not going to be drawn into lengthy email exchanges. You may make a complaint and the details of how to do so are on the Force web page. The CPN warning however is very clear. Please adhere to its contents.

I am not going to be drawn into lengthy email exchanges. You may make a complaint and the details of how to do so are on the Force web page. The CPN [Community Protection Notice] warning however is very clear. Please adhere to its contents.

My comments.

It seems obvious to me that some representative of South Yorkshire Police, whether Sergeant Simon Kirkham or someone else, decided to make use of a class of document which was completely unsuitable for the purpose. After mention of the fine, it gives the impression - more exactly, it states - that I could be 'required to pay the cost of remedial work carried out by the Local Authority and items used in the commission of the offence may be forfeited or seized.'

They took an existing document type which they thought would just about do and added their own contribution, the ridiculous allegations of the section 'Details of the conduct.' Then, perhaps, without glancing at what they'd written, let alone reading it carefully, to ensure that it conveyed what they wanted to convey, to ensure that it provided no opportunity for reasonable criticism, nothing that could harm their reputation, they arranged for its delivery to me.

The fact that there's extensive material concerned with Lu Skerratt-Love on this site is simply the result of her own recklessness. At various times, I've resolved to publish nothing more, or next to nothing, on Lu Skerratt-Love and included a note to this effect on the site, but then she's gone ahead and made a fresh complaint and I've responded to the complaint by adding further comment. This latest complaint of hers called for fresh comment and I've obliged.

I haven't responded by sending her an email or a letter. The demand that I should stop sending emails to her or letters to her is nonsensical. She must know that I haven't been doing either of these things. This amounts to implicit or active falsification on her part, surely.

As for my Website, she has absolutely no chance of persuading me or forcing me to remove material from this Website. Prayer would be ineffectual and contacting the police would be ineffectual. I remove material myself for a variety of reasons, if, for instance, I feel that it isn't fair-minded or sufficiently fair-minded. None of it is abuse, foul in tone. South Yorkshire Police would never be successful in dictating what should and shouldn't appear on the site. There's so much extreme, violent content out there and to suppose that this site should be singled out for attempted censorship would be ridiculous - and sinister.

The 'Details of conduct' mentions 'letters.' There was just one letter, and this is it. I delivered it to the Church Army building in Sheffield, one copy for Dr Tim Ling, one copy for Lu Skerratt-Love and one copy for Dr Andy Wier.

8 October, 2021. Letter from me to Dr Ling, Lu Skerratt-Love and Dr Wier. This is the only communication which Lu Skerratt-Love has ever received from me. I delivered it, but I've no way of knowing if she read it.

Dear Dr Ling,

There are matters which I need to bring to your attention, and the attention of Lu Skerratt-Love. I can't use the most convenient method, for me, email, since you've blocked my emails. This is simply a short preliminary note. I don't discuss in any detail these matters

Instead of using paper and envelope, buying a stamp and using the post, I've chosen instead to call at the Church Army building and deliver this
note in person and I intend to use this method whenever I can justify a further communication to you or to Lu Skerratt-Love. [I've never made any further communication with Tim Ling, Lu Skerratt-Love or anyone else at Church Army Sheffield. This was the only letter they've received.] I've decided further to make use of 'open' communication, without enclosure in an envelope. The matters I need to bring to your attention aren't confidential.

Banning, blocking and attempts at blatant censorship should be avoided by people in any organization which values its reputation. Your decision to block emails from me was completely unjustifiable. All I had done was to send emails to a few people and organizations to inform them of my concerns about the proposal to set up a garden church at the Morley Street Allotment site. The reasons I gave and the evidence I gave were to do with matters of allotment law, security and safety. I've documented the issues in detail and published them on my Website. The documentation will be extended to take note of future developments. The people and organizations who received my emails - few in number - could be expected to find the issue of a garden church relevant, for example, St Marks Church.

Lu Skerratt-Love had publicized the issue on the St Marks Church Website.The tone of my emails was courteous. I used Lu Skerratt-Love's Church army email address because I had no alternative. This was the only email address I could find.I felt at the time that it was unwise of her not to make available an alternative email address.

Lu Skerratt-Love's decision to complain to the police, her attempt to have me remove material from my own Website, was disastrously misguided, like your decision to block my emails. Lu Skerratt-Love's twitter page is full of complaints against the police but she chose to turn to the police (as an alternative to prayer, perhaps, or to supplement prayer). This, to me, was wasting police time. I don't claim that it
was wasting police time in the strict legal sense but if people demand action from the police for the flimsiest of reasons, or no good reason at all, or for thoroughly bad reasons, then the police have less time available for all the other issues, far more important issues, which they have to dealwith, such as doing something to curb the excesses of Extinction Rebellion, rape, violent crime, and many more. [I don't equate the excesses of Extinction Rebellion with rape or violent crime, of course. This is a short list with examples which are very different in their degree of seriousness.]

I don't make demands myself, although I think that an apology is due from Lu Skerratt-Love and yourself. If you find the arguments and evidence I've put forward on my Website unpersuasive, then by all means let me have - better still, publicize - your counter arguments and evidence.

As I say, this is only a preliminary stage. I've already spent a great deal of time and effort on these matters and I'm willing to do far more. Any necessary communication with you or Lu Skerratt-Love will be by personal delivery of a note. [I didn't deliver any more notes/letters.]

I hope you will be able to bring this note to the attention of Lu Skerratt-Love. [In the event, I provided a copy for Lu Skerratt-Love.] Obviously, you're free to bring it to the attention of other people as well.

Best Wishes,

Paul Hurt

I've sent one letter, a single letter, no more than one letter to a very few people at the Church Army, a tiny handful of people. I'd no desire to send any further letters, and I haven't. All this was a long time ago.

The Church Army can carry on making grotesque claims but I hope, I fervently hope, that in future, they won't find that South Yorkshire Police are willing accomplices - to be more accurate, that tiny proportion of South Yorkshire Police represented by the author of this piece, whether it was Simon Kirkham or someone else. Otherwise, I find South Yorkshire Police blameless in this particular matter, but the stupid actions of one person or a few can have disproportionate effects on the good name of an organization.

Now, some background information and context concerning two previous approaches by South Yorkshire Police.

In early October, a police officer from South Yorkshire Police phoned me to inform me that Lu Skerratt-Love had complained about some material on my Website. The officer asked me to remove it. I refused. South Yorkshire Police has absolutely no right to censor Websites in this way. . The content isn't abusive or threatening.

On 22 November, 2022 I found a card from PC - - of South Yorkshire police (I don't provide the name of the member of South Yorkshire Police here.) I contacted this member and was informed that Lu Skerratt-Love had contacted South Yorkshire Police to complain about me. She had alleged that my emails to her were unwanted and must stop.

I sent an email to PC - - the member of South Yorkshire Police who had left the card. This is a copy. It includes the content of the email I sent to Lu Skerratt-Love but not received by her - matters to do with such matters as security and safety. A copy of the email sent to .. :

Despite the length of this email, this is simply an outline of my concerns. This is an issue which I've already documented in detail and which will now require further documentation. You write, 'Lucy has contacted us to ask you to stop contacting her as the contact is unwanted, therefore please can I ask that you send no further emails.'

This supposedly simple request has alarming implications for freedom of expression, but not only for freedom of expression. You may or may not be aware that I received a phone call from South Yorkshire Police in October giving me information about her approach to the police. She had received only ONE email from me, quoted below. I sent the email to Lu Skerratt-Love because she has an association with the 'Forest Church Movement' in Sheffield and a Forest Church meeting was planned for an allotment site near to my allotments. I took the view that certain difficulties had been overlooked in this plan, including difficulties to do with security and safety.

In fact, the meeting of the Forest (or Garden) Church planned for September never took place. The Facebook page of the Garden Church has given the information that the launch has been delayed owing to concerns to do with safety. It can only have been my emails which alerted the garden church to issues to do with safety, issues which have still not been resolved, it seems - no date has been announced for the inaugural meeting of the garden church. I take the view that my email has served a good purpose. In a world where abusive, threatening communications are commonplace, this email is in a different category completely. It simply provide arguments and relevant evidence.

I felt at the time that Lu Skerratt-Love made her original approach to South Yorkshire Police that this was not a matter which should take up the time of the police. South Yorkshire Police, like other police forces, faces so many pressures, so many demands for action, including, obviously, ones to do with terrorist action and other gross assaults on our democratic way of life - and, also demands for action which are completely unreasonable, which overlook the demands on police time. Lu Skerratt-Love received ONE email from me and has received NO further emails from me. The fact that now she makes a second demand for action on your part seems to me completely unreasonable.

Why this issue should be raised again is beyond my comprehension. All the more so, as Lu Skerratt-Love has travelled to London to take part in Extinction Rebellion protests - protests which again take up a disproportionate amount of police time. When the police are attending to Extinction Rebellion protests then they can't be attending to other issues, including emergencies. I've retained a copy of a tweet of Lu Skerratt-Love which quotes a vitriolic, foul-mouthed attack on the police. I won't give it here, but to me, it amounts to a complete misrepresentation and distortion of the state of the police force in this country and which completely ignores the massive contribution it makes.

My view is that reasonable, evidence-based action to address the issue of climate change can't possibly take place if society descends into chaos, and the police force (and the armed forces of the country) are the most important of all defences against the state of civil disorder and the breakdown of society which Extinction Rebellion seems to accept all too readily but people with a regard for democratic values can't possibly accept. But I urge you to consider also the vital importance of freedom of expression in maintaining our democratic values.

Alan Billings, the former South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner, identified 'Treating People Fairly' as one of the three 'Policing and Crime Priorities' in his glossy publication 'Keeping Safe: The Police and Crime Plan for South Yorkshire 2017 - 2021, Renewed 2019.'

Only a few categories of unfairness are discussed on the page 'Treating People Fairly,' for example these:

'Ethnic minorities point to the fact that they are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system and may feel that they have undue police attention.'

Other minorities - such as LGBT ... - may say they are not recognized or understood as well as they should be. If hate crimes are to be properly recorded and investigated we need the police to understand what the issues are and what is at stake.'

Dr Billings must understand that people who don't belong to the communities he singles out can be treated unfairly by the police. I hope that Dr Billings understands that an accusation of hate crime can be completely unfair, completely unjust - and that the issuing of a Harassment Warning can be completely unfair, completely unjust.

Violent crime in South Yorkshire doesn't have a section to itself in the short list of Priorities. It's included in Priority 2, with anti-social behaviour and rates only a very brief mention: 'In 2018 we were anxious about the rise in violent crime, particularly stabbings.' This is followed by a few general comments, including this hope: ' ... we want to understand the reasons for the increase and we want to see it brought down.' Gun crime in South Yorkshire doesn't rate a mention at all, unlike the problem of off-road bikes:

'Often it is anti-social behaviour rather than crime that most disturbs people. For example, last year many told me how their lives were blighted by off-road bikes. I was pleased, therefore, when the police established their biker team that has been very successful in pursuing and apprehending those who cause nuisance - and crushing bikes.'

The police haven't been as successful in pursuing and apprehending those who cause much more than a nuisance.

In the same section, Dr Billings makes this claim:

'In South Yorkshire, all crime is investigated.'

It's alarming that someone in his position, with his power can make such a ridiculous claim. f he looks into the matter more closely, he'll find that the claim is completely false.

I'm a non-believer. Dr Billings isn't a non-believer. He describes himself as a retired Church of England priest. In 'Keeping Safe,' very unwisely, he includes, on Page 2, in very large, very prominent letters, this quotation from the Old Testament prophet Jeremiah:

'Seek the well-being of this place ... for in its well-being you will find your own.' Jeremiah 29:7.

His Foreword ends with this:

The overriding message for the coming year (2019-20) is that we must get better at working together for the common good. The prophet put it this way: 'Seek the well-being of the place where you are set ... for in its well-being you will find your own'. (Jeremiah 29:7.)

Jeremiah's words had a specific reference. Dr Billings ignores this and ignores the context. The complete text of Jeremiah 29.7, in the translation of the King James Bible:

'And seek the peace of the city whither I have caused you to be carried away captives, and pray unto the LORD for it: for in the peace thereof shall ye have peace.'

The New International Version translation:

'Also, seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the LORD for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper.'

'If it prospers, so will you.' Is this necessarily the case? Not in the least. Does the second statement necessarily follow from the first? Not at all.

There was, of course, absolutely no need for Dr Billings to include this quotation from an Old Testament prophet. He should have realized that he was writing for a community made up of many different groups - not just Church of England believers and other Christian believers but non-believers, people with no belief in God or the Bible, either the Bible as the inspired word of God or the Bible as a good guide to contemporary problems, a community which includes people with a wide range of religious and a wide-range of non-Christian views.

Information next about the Durham connection, with a quote from the section 'Details of the conduct ...' in the 'Community Protection Notice - Written Warning' issued to me by two officers of South after 'the knock at the door,' which came as a complete surprise. I point out that there hadn't been any attempt to contact me first to find out what I had to say about these things. Before this visit to present me with the Community Protection Notice, one evening I received a phone call from a member of South Yorkshire Police telling me to remove all material on Lu Skerratt-Love from this Website. I didn't agree to do that. This was a blatant attempt at censorship, of course.

I complained to the South Yorkshire Police Professional Standards Department about the blatant injustice of the visit to present the document. On this page, I refer to the person who handled my complaint as 'the investigator.' I got nowhere with my complaint. The complainant, the investigator and others, were apparently working in a different version of reality from the version known to me.

The document produced by the Investigator in the furtherance of his investigation was the first time that I learned that material concerning Durham University had been included in the dossier and used as evidence against me, leading to the issuing of the Written Warning! It was never so much as mentioned in the Written Warning or anywhere else - and now, the person who was investigating my complaint gave me this completely new claim!

I had contacted some academics at Durham University and informed them that I intended to include profiles in my page on Universities. At that time, there was just one page, almost entirely on Cambridge University. Like Cambridge University, Durham has a large number of academics teaching and doing research in various branches of theology - so many, that I think of Durham as almost a 'Faith University,' with some similarities with faith schools. I decided not to include any profiles. There has never been any mention of Durham University in my pages on Universities. This issue should never have been included in the Investigator's document.

The claim that I contacted Lu Skerratt-Love by email is false. I did send her an email but she never received it. The claim that I contacted her colleagues by email is false. Only Dr Tim Ling received an email from me. I did deliver to the Headquarters of the Church Army three letters, addressed to Lu Skerratt-Love, Dr Tim Ling and Dr Andy Wier, all of the Research Unit of the Church Army. The emails I sent but which weren't received, with that single exception, and the letters were courteous. I gave information about some problems and difficulties arising from the proposal to start a garden church at allotments near to mine.

Garden Churches are examples of the approach to evangelism known as 'Fresh Expressions.' The Research Unit has worked in the field of Fresh Expressions. The points I made were completely relevant to their work. They didn't see it in that way, obviously. To them, any mention of problems and dificulties, such as problems of security and safety at the site of the proposed garden church, was unwanted, out of order, information to be suppressed.

It seems obvious to me that the Christian belief of Lu Skerratt-Love implicit in the document is of something, fragile, in need of protection (including protection from some realities). I'm under absolutely no obligation to treat Lu Skerratt-Love as a timid being. In my experience, Lu Skerratt-Love is far from timid, in fact dominant - or makes attempts at dominance.

More about 'The Durham Connection.' I wrote to quite a number of theologians at Durham University, quoting an email I'd sent to Dr Clemson, who was the supervisor of Lu Skerratt-Love at the time when she was working on her doctoral thesis. As I've pointed out, my intention to add material on Durham University, specifically theologians at Durham University, was never realized. Then, as now, there were so many demands on my time.

Dear Professor ... [quite a number of recipients of this email were professors]

Below, you'll find a copy of an email I've sent to Dr Frances Clemson. I now intend to add comment and discussion concerned with some members of the academic staff in the Department of Theology and Religion at Durham to my page on Christian religion and my page on Cambridge University and other universities, a page which already contains many profiles of academic theologians and others, such as College chaplains. The addresses of these two pages can be found in the email addressed to Dr Clemson. I don't intend to add very much more material to the existing material on Lu Skerratt-Love, the doctoral student at Durham University mentioned in the email and discussed in my page on Christian religion. I see it as important not to give disproportionate criticism of someone who is a doctoral student. Academic theologians can expect to have their views and beliefs examined more comprehensively, in greater detail, in some cases at least. However, it will be quite some time before I'm able to begin the work and much longer before I can begin to do justice to the issues.

Dear Dr Clemson,

'... My page on Christian religion and the Church of England already includes material on Lu Skerratt-Love, on the specific issue of a garden church which is planned for allotments near the two allotments which I cultivate. If you look at the Home Page of my site, you'll notice that gardening is a very prominent aspect of the site. There are many gardening pages. I've actively opposed the plan to hold garden church services. Lu Skerratt-Love is a prominent advocate for forest churches and has publicized the proposed garden church in notices at various Sheffield churches, including St Marks Church, the church she attends regularly. I intend to revise and extend the existing material on this issue ...

My page on Christian religion also gives information about a matter which concerns me and which should concern you, surely: an issue to do with the free flow of comment and other information, the necessity of not restricting the free flow of comment and information except when the comment and information are incompatible with the values of a liberal democracy, as with comment and information supporting terrorism.

Lu Skerratt-Love is employed by the Church Army. She should make available an email address which allows communication in matters not directly related to her work with the Church Army. I searched, but couldn't find any other email address, so I used her (or 'their') Church Army address.

The emails I've sent on the issue of the garden church have pointed out some problems and difficulties which the organizers have ignored or failed to recognize, such as issues to do with security and safety on the site, the staggering fact that the site contains a massive pile of assorted rubbish, a hazard to wildlife and a potential hazard for anyone entering the site, and some problems to do with using allotments for the purposes of Christian evangelism.

... Dr Ling of the Church Army promptly informed me that he was blocking emails from me not just to Lu Skerratt-Love but to all members of the Church Army research department. I also received a call from Sheffield police to inform me that Lu Skerratt-Love didn't find acceptable material relating to her (or 'them') as well as material relating to the garden church, perhaps. It was clear that she wanted the material removed - a blatant attempt at censorship.

All this has wider implications, very important implications. Academics - academic staff and doctoral students - should have a concern, and not just a slight concern, for the conditions which allow free debate and comment to flourish and the conditions which stifle or make impossible free debate and comment. For this reason, I'll be bringing the matters I mention in this email to the attention of other academic staff in the department of theology and religion at Durham University and the wider academic community, including other departments at Durham.

I have self-imposed restrictions on the comments I make and the material I publish. For example, as I make clear in various places on the site, all emails sent to me are regarded as private. I won't publish them in whole or in part without the permission of the sender. [This was my policy for almost all the time that my Website has been in existence. I It's still my policy, but very recently, I made some exceptions. There are very few of these. My policy now is given on the page About this site.

Another is the fact that I don't criticize or comment on the arguments and evidence used by undergraduates. Undergraduates are finding their way, they should be allowed to make all kinds of mistakes without repercussions - it's perfectly possible, of course, for undergraduates to show qualities which doctoral students and academic staff don't possess in the least. I can't make the same alowances for postgrauduate students. If Lu Skerratt-Love had been an undergraduate at the time of her completely unwarranted approach to the police, nothing would have appeared on my Website. As it is, she has failed to appreciate the huge demands on the police. This is an important issue in itself, and I intend to add material to the site, with mention of Lu Skerratt-Love's blunder - and it was a blunder, of that I'm sure (yet again, argument and evidence will be needed to corroborate the claim, of course.) 'Wasting police time' amounts to an offence in law, but I don't claim, of course, that she committed an offence.

If a post-graduate student has responsibilities which go beyond the responsibilities of undergraduates, the responsibilities of academic staff such as yourself are very much greater than those of posgraudate students. I've already made it clear on my page on Christian religion that I wouldn't wish to single out Lu Skerratt-Love for disproportionate criticism. The focus of my attention in the profile to be added to the page on Christian religion will be you, not Lu Skerratt-Love. [As I mention, I decided not to proceed with the profile.]

In all my communications with Christians, I've stressed argument and evidence. My own practice is to be as thorough as possible in providing argument and evidence. The constraints of time don't allow me always to be as thorough as I would like, of course. Not once has any Christian attempted to offer a defence, to offer even the least argument and evidence. I draw my own conclusions from that.

There are pages of the site not already mentioned which have relevance to the issues here, such as my page on Israel and Palestinian ideology which has material on same-sex relations in Israel (completely legal) and the Palestinian territories (illegal in Gaza) and which includes revealing results from a survey carried out by a reputable polling organization, Pew Research. Safeguarding same-sex relations is a matter of intense concern to me, the removal of legal obstacles and legal punishments in countries where they exist is a matter of intense concern, along with so many other issues to do with 'human rights.' For many, many years, I worked on a wide range of these issues as an active member of Amnesty International.

From the page

https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/06/25/global-divide-on-homosexuality-persists/

which gives more significant information,

'Religious affiliation also plays a key role in views towards acceptance of homosexuality. For example, those who are religiously unaffiliated, sometimes called religious “nones,” (that is, those who identify as atheist, agnostic or “nothing in particular”) tend to be more accepting of homosexuality. Though the opinions of religiously unaffiliated people can vary widely, in virtually every country surveyed with a sufficient number of unaffiliated respondents, “nones” are more accepting of homosexuality than the affiliated. In most cases, the affiliated comparison group is made up of Christians. But even among Christians, Catholics are more likely to accept homosexuality than Protestants and evangelicals in many countries with enough adherents for analysis.'

All the information about 'The Durham Connection' which reached South Yorkshire Police and which was included in their grossly distorted dossier, published and unpublished items, must have come from Lu Skerratt-Love, the doctoral candidate at Durham University. I take the view that this was completely irresponsible behaviour, far worse than that, in fact.

I take the view that in the aftermath of mistakes, it's not a good tactic in general to single out one individual or the actions of one invidual, or a limited number of individuals, and put all the blame upon them. In specific instances, it may be the right thing to do, but usually, there's the context to consider, wider responsibilities to consider. Even if a blunder would never have occurred if it hadn't been for the actions of one individual, or a limited number of people, very often, the actions would never have occurred, the mistakes would never have been made if the circumstances had been very different.

Currently, there's a debate, a discussion concerning the culpability of the Church of England in the abuse scandal arising from the sadistic John Smyth. I think that the debate needs to be a wider one, taking account of the wider issue of the integrity of the church. Collusion, attempts to cover up cases of abuse, are part of a wider issue, lack of integrity. There are damaging, perhaps massively damaging consequences which can arise from cases in which abuse wasn't a factor at all.

Granting immunity, or a high degree of immunity to people can be very damaging. Nobody in the Church, as in other organizations, should be assumed to be beyond scrutiny, beyond criticism in all or almost all circumstances.

There's widespread criticism of the Church of England which involves the claim that the Church favours LGBTQIA+ people at the expense of others, in particular heterosexual people. This is to overlook the fact that the Church of England contains many, many people with very, very different views on the issue, including crude and backward views. For an example, see below the extract from the Rock Christian Centre, Sheffield. In fact, the Rock Christian Centre is a member of the same group of churches which includes as members the 'progressive' St Mark's Church, Sheffield and the Diocese of Sheffield. There are grotesque contradictions to be found in this diocese - as in the others.

This is a case with incongruities, grotesque contradictions, in fact. Since Lu Skerratt-Love obviously has strong views concerning human sexuality, it's surprising, to say the least, that it was another Christian with strong views concerning human sexuality, Sergeant Simon Kirkham, who was so helpful to Lu Skerratt-Love, to put it mildly. Surprising because Simon Kirkham's strong views on human sexuality are diametrically opposed to those of LS-L.

Sergeant Kirkham was a member of the Christian Police Association at the time of this episode, and before and after the episode, and the Christian Police Association has crude, repugnant views on human sexuality. They will be views very similar to Churches in the Evangelical Alliance. The Rock Christian Centre is a member of the Alliance. There's more about this church in my page Church Donations. Surprisingly - astonishingly - St Mark's Church, the 'liberal' church (their description, not mine) where LS-L was a Trustee, is a member of the 'Arise' group of churches, which includes as members the Rock Christian Centre and many other churches which are members of the Evangelical Alliance.

This is an extract from the Rock Christian Centre Website which I quote in my section on the centre. Note the condemnation of 'homosexuality.' I can be sure that Sergeant Simon Kirkham's view would be the same.

The fury of Almighty God against evil is evidence of His goodness. If He wasn’t angered, He wouldn’t be good. We cannot separate God’s goodness from His anger. Again, if God is good by nature, He must be unspeakably angry at wickedness.

But His goodness is so great that His anger isn’t confined to the evils of rape and murder. Nothing is hidden from His pure and holy eyes. He is outraged by torture, terrorism, abortion, theft, lying, adultery, fornication, pedophilia, homosexuality, and blasphemy.

What probably happened, what seems to have happened, is that when Sergeant Kirkham decided to act - taking the side of LS-L without bothering to find out what I had to say - he decided that it was more important to support a fellow Christian against a non-Christian, myself, even though their Christian views have differences. I maintain that so called 'liberal' Christians (who may well be fanatical ideologists, in my experience) often believe in many of the backward doctrines of the unreconstructed Conservative Evangelicals or other orthodox Christians. Often, the liberals are very orthodox, except in restricted areas, such as human sexuality.

Mission Area Holy Communion – Festival of Pentecost 23/05/2021
Lu Skerratt-Love

May the words of my mouth and the meditations of all our hearts be acceptable in your sight, O God our Father.

‘I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own, but will speak whatever he hears, and he will declare to you the things that are to come…’ (John 16:12-13)

The passages of scripture that we have heard today, I believe, are texts for this moment. They are not resigned to the dusty scrolls of the early church or read out on a Sunday morning simply to be forgotten until next year, but living and breathing, calling us to attempt to understand our time, this time…inside of God’s time.

...

And the miracle of Pentecost calls us to not just take this in but to declare this revolutionary intimacy by going out, establishing a church, an ecclesia. As I said, these texts are for this moment and here is my challenge to you, to us – how do we imagine the mission of the church when we return and listen again to the tongues and voices proclaiming God, proclaiming love and life together?

[The 'miracle of Pentecost' did nothing to relieve the burden of slaves in the Roman Empire. Slaves, including slave children, were still bought and sold,slaves continued to be treated with the utmost cruelty in so many cases, Christian as well as non-Christian. It's overwhelmingly lkely that the floggings carried out by John Smyth were carried out by many Christian slave owners. This was a society without any of the checks and balances and tradition of humanitarianism found in this society - not that the checks and balances are always effective.]

cts 2, verses 4-8, is the epicentre of this revolution and I think it is worth starting to reacquaint ourselves with this passage.

All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them ability. Now, there were devout Jews from every nation under heaven living in Jerusalem. And at this sound the crowd gathered and was bewildered, because each one heard them speaking in the native language of each. Amazed and astonished, they asked, “Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? And how is it that we hear, each of us, in our own native language?

These verses are understood in many commentaries to be the defining moment of the early church. The beginning of a community without Jesus as flesh but Jesus as Christ, as The Triune God. This a community just like us sitting here today, but broken open by the sheer act of God – and it is in the breaking open, in the risk and the fear and language that the community is created. It is this risk, and its corresponding responsibility and accountability where we are called as a church to tell, to proclaim, to evangelise that another way of loving and living in community is possible.

If we are to do mission as a Mission Area, if we are to offer another option of what the love of God looks like and feels like then maybe we need to be less afraid of our own voices, less tentative of our faith and see how the Holy Spirit can work through our own tongues and mouths and words and actions. Maybe we need to say the Apostles Creed, listening for those words and being proud that it’s what we wrestle with and believe, maybe we need to pray more together in meetings, maybe we need to be more intentional when we drop items off at the food bank, maybe we need to relearn how to take risks and talk about our faith so that renews and empowers the communities around us…because the Holy Spirit can change things but we need to have the courage to allow this to happen – we need to learn and relearn our own language of evangelism, of the kind of love that is not embarrassing or you feel you need to apologise for, so we can say yes, God is here and we do not and should not and cannot, control that.

The Spirit defies order and control and physics and power. No structure is safe from the wind and the fire and nothing is beyond its touch.

[But the institution of slavery was 'safe from the wind and the fire.' Slavery was 'beyond its touch.' The 'miracle of Pentecost' did nothing to relieve the burden of slaves in the Roman Empire. Slaves, including slave children, were still bought and sold,slaves continued to be treated with the utmost cruelty in so many cases, Christian as well as non-Christian. It's overwhelmingly lkely that the floggings carried out by John Smyth were carried out by many Christian slave owners. This was a society without any of the checks and balances and tradition of humanitarianism found in this society - not that the checks and balances are always effective.]

And this display of divine power signals the coming of the Spirit in the reality of human life. This is not what the disciples wanted or were praying to God for, we see that in their bewilderment and questioning…and yet it came and they were faced with it and it was hard. This is the Holy Spirit on God’s terms, not confined by human power of who we like, or church buildings or episcopal oversight but by God, waiting in silence and then touching and taking hold of tongue, mouth, breath, mind, heart and body…

Amen.

This is prose which prefers fine-sounding phrases, empty phrases to any contact with realities.

Again and again, organizations and institutions are condemned out of hand, based on incidents involving very few people, in many cases. I take the view that it's essential to carry out a fair-minded Survey, which includes strengths as well as weaknesses and which excludes, so far as possible, nothing which is relevant to the outcome.

For these reasons, I don't give generalized criticism of South Yorkshire Police. I fully acknowledge the strengths of the force and have no difficulty at all in recognizing that in their case, the strengths outweigh the weaknesses by a wide margin.

My view is that the case is very different in the case of the churches. The historical record of the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church contains so many hideous episodes and acts. I mention some notorious examples in my page Church Donations, my page on abuses in the Churches and other pages.

Community Protection Notice: WRITTEN WARNING

Emails to (but not from) the Church Army

Church Documents: faith and practice, claims and realities