The time has come to add photographs taken by me of Church people to the
site - specifically, the NEW CREATIONS discussed in the column to the right.
I view the images as having multiple functions. One of the most important is
documentation. Photo-documentation is an established field, and very often
photo-documentation is used as proof or evidence of something. This rates
very low in my ordering for the most part. I regard the collection and
use of evidence and the constructive use of evidence as very important but
photographs will rarely produce definitive evidence in this field of
counter-evangelism. Photographs of a paper document may be genuinely useful
but the photographs I intend to take are photographs of people, singly or in
groups, perhaps large groups.
I observe copyright. I use photographs I'm free use with no infringement of
copyright, supplemented
by photographs I've taken myself. As yet I've never taken any photographs of church
people at any time. I've taken photographs of Churches and church
buildings - the photographs taken from outside Church propertiy. Most of my photographic activities - which aren't a priority for me
- are concerned with landscape, with plants and with buildings.
I obviously use images very often on this site but the images have secondary
importance. Far more important is evidence expressed in other ways, above
all, in words, but I also make use of diagrams. Images can't be used to
express an argument. Argument can be accompanied by evidence in the form of
a photograph but again, words are far more important to me.
In the United Kingdom, photographing and filming members of the public in a
public place is freely allowed. The police have no powers to stop
photographing and filming in public places and no permit is needed.
Photographing and filming of police personnel is also freely permitted. The
exceptions are few, as in photography or filming for criminal or terrorist
purposes.
I never take photographs or film of members of the police and I never take
photographs of children or film of children, even though the law allows it.
The law freely allows the photographing and filming of members of the clergy
and members of church congregations - not inside the church, obviously, or
on land belonging to a church.
I intend now to take photographs of ordinary members of Church congregations
- people regarded by the Church as 'New Creations in Christ' - to illustrate
this page, as well as people who would probably regard themselves as more
important than that, the people who are church 'leaders' or church
organization leaders, and ordinary members of the clergy.
People in the Churches and
Church organizations mentioned on this site - and others - in the column to the left (or the
right) may find
an image of themselves in the public domain, in a page of this site. People in churches and
church organizations not mentioned on this page or anywhere else in this
site may find themselves in the same position. I have given undertakings to
some Church people that they and their churches won't be criticized on this
page or anywhere else on this site, when I've contacted them about matters
which aren't directly concerned with Christian belief.
Members of Church congregations - not nominal members, but people who think
that they have accepted Jesus and that God has accepted them - are, in their
own estimation, Very Important People: 'New Creations.' If they
panic when they find themselves on this page - but the chance of this
happening is obviously very low, the chance of being in a photograph here,
not the chance of panicking if a photograph appears - if they resent that
very much - why? Is their Christian faith that weak? I don't give anyone any
credit for having a 'strong' Christian faith, though. I'd regard 'strong'
Christian faith as evidence of more advanced stupidity than in the case of
nominal Christian faith.
I first began to take photographs of people and to publish the photographs
on this site in connection with the Pro-Palestinian protest camp at
Sheffield University in 2024. I considered it a futile but very harmful
exercise in self-deception and ignorance and was certain that it would
close, and it did close, without achieving anything. The protesters were
students, supplemented on occasion by worse, much worse
contingents of Sheffield Palestine Solidarity Campaign (SPSC.)
My page The Sheffield University Camp: the case
against includes many photographs of protesters taken by me. In
the first column of this page I give my reasons for taking photographs at the
camp and the problems - in particular, active hostility. I didn't allow that
to stop me.
My page South Yorkshire Advocacy for Israel gives
argument and evidence as to why I strongly support Israel, why I oppose
protests carried out by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and similar
organizations and why I opposed the pro-Palestinian protest camp at
Sheffield University.
I took
photographs and film footage of the students and went to Palestine
Solidarity Campaign protests and took photographs and film footage of these
protesters, despite their objections and worse. They tried it on. There was
threatening behaviour, they used various tactics to try to stop me carrying out this lawful
activity. At a protest which took place in front of Sheffield City Hall, I
was attacked and they tried to take my camera away. The attack was recorded.
From my page on the
pro-Palestinian camp at Sheffield University,
'In a world where people take photographs very, very often with their phones
(I'm not one of them - I use photography far less often, in a far more
restricted way, always with a camera, not a phone) then their ban on
photographs of themselves is ridiculous - their attempted
ban is ridiculous. Students and members of the Sheffield Palestine
Solidarity Campaign made determined efforts to stop me taking photographs
and filming. Before one pro-Palestinian protest got away, in front of
Sheffield City Hall, I was attacked and one of the protesters tried to get
hold of my camera. He did get hold of it but I refused to let go of it. When
I was able to examine it, I found it had stopped working but later, it began
to work again. I had film of the attack and I had a photograph of the
man who had tried to take away the camera. I contacted South Yorkshire
Police and they examined footage from a security camera in the area (or more
than one camera.) They didn't locate a recording of the incident. After
this, I carried on photographing and filming.
If I managed to withstand their use of force, I'm sure I can withstand any
attempts by Church members to stop me taking photographs and filming. I was
very reluctant to take photographs of students, to film students and to use
the material on this site. It can be found on the page
Sheffield University Camp: the case against. I
take the view that the photographs of people enhance the page. This
encampment, like the other encampments which sprang up and vanished,
was a place of human activity - completely misdirected human activity - just
as churches are places of human activity - again, completely misdirected.
The claim is that the churches are also places of divine activity, like the
world as a whole, the universe as a whole, a claim I obviously contest
repeatedly. People at the former encampments and in the churches are
alike in having a very high opinion of themselves and their importance in
the scheme of things - an opinion which isn't deserved in the least. As they
are such important people - in their view - they can have no possible
objection to someone recording them in action. The strength of objections to
being photographed will indicate that they have some insecurities.
I
take the view that young people should be allowed to make mistakes, to have
very varied experience of life, unless, of course, the mistakes have very
serious consequences, such as acts of violence. The mistakes may take the form of
misdirected activism for bad causes, misdirected activity in churches and,
of course, in so many other mistaken ways.
Coming to conclusions about the importance of these experiences,
distinguishing the successes from the embarrassing failures, can come later.
The lives of these people shouldn't be ruined by the mistakes
unless the mistakes were very, very serious.
I did feel that many of the students
were already hardened fanatical or semi-fanatical ideologists. Some of them,
I think, are likely to stay that way but I've obviously no evidence of that.
The main thing is that students were actively trying to stop me taking
photographs or filming and I had no intention of allowing them to stop me.
If by any chance any of these students see this section and contact me to
ask me to remove the material from the site, I'll be glad to remove it. I
wouldn't consider that as giving way to censorship. The student, or rather
former student, is likely to want removal of the material simply because the
person has moved on, isn't the same kind of person who went in for
deliberate obstruction. Even if they're hardened ideologists, they may alter
their views later and it may be that removal of the material will encourage
them to do that. But I've no way of knowing. They're in charge of their
lives, not me.
Young people who become active in churches may grow out of it, come to
realize that the world is a far more complex and contradictory place than
they realized, although, as in the case of non-religious ideologies, I'm
perhaps more pessimistic than optimistic. There are many people unlikely to
advance beyond these infantile stages.
Anyone who is having a hard time and finds that their photograph is
displayed on this site, or that they're part of a photograph displayed, is
welcome to contact me by email or phone and the photograph will be removed,
if I think it would be unfair to include it in the display. People who
decide that they are no longer Christians will obviously have any photograph
in which they appear removed, if I'm informed of that fact.
As I point out in various places, in particular the page
About this site, I
treat emails and phone calls to me as confidential, with practically no
exceptions.
The photographs of church people which already appear on the site are ones which
don't infringe copyright. I feel that the relative scarcity of these
photographs in the public domain, compared with ones protected by copyright,
amounts to a kind of unfairness. The unfairness doesn't lie in the copyright
protection but in the fact that the people whose photographs are publicized
in this way are in the minority, the ones whose photographic identity isn't
in the public domain are in the majority. This is a situation, obviously,
where in most cases the church member would rather have anonymity than
publicity. I view a wider range of photographic examples as fairer. The
people whose photographs appear are likely to view things differently.
I've made a firm decision not to include photographs of some people, for one
reason or another, even if I could obtain a photograph easily.
I don't give my reasons, but hey include
Pete Wilcox, the Bishop of Sheffield, Beth Keith, the new Vicar of St Mark's Church, Sheffield,
Dr Kathy Rhodes, Sheffield Diocese Environmental Officer, Dr Margaret Ainger
(So called 'Diocesan Eco Church Champion.')
I'll provide more material on these people in verbal form, if necessary.
Existing material can be extended as well as revised when necessary.
I don't intend to begin taking photographs and film footage yet. I intend to
contact a range of churches and church organizations to inform them that I
may begin taking photographs and film footage from 1 January 2025 but not
before.
Whatever the subject - the subjects have never included church people so far
- I use only a small proportion of photographs that I take. It's very likely
that most of the photographs I take after 1 January 2025 will be deleted.
I practically
never use film footage as film. The exception is the footage showing
installation of a swift nesting box I designed. Instead, I sometimes extract
still
photographs from the moving footage.
Although I'll sometimes make use of images which don't satisfy me very much
at all, as when the images were obtained in difficult circumstances, or when
it seems better to use an image than not to use one, and no other images are
available.
Images above, from left to right, Wilson Carlile Centre, Church Army;
two views of Sheffield Cathedral; STC, Crookes; St Mark's, Broomhill; St
Mary's, Walkley; Christ Church, Fulwood; St John's, Ranmoor, all in
Sheffield.
These are amongst the churches / church organization which will form the
principal source of images to be used on this page and, in some cases, other
places on the site but I don't restrict myself to photographing and filming
in only these places. If the opportunity allows, churches and church
organizations much further away can provide me with material. The demands on
my time are many, and it shouldn't be supposed that my activity in this
field will ever become intensive.
I'm only interested in photographic and film documentation of people who can
be described as 'New Creations,' in the sense explained below, people who
can also be described as having accepted Jesus as Lord and Saviour, with the
attendant benefits - according to orthodox Christian doctrine, not in the
least according to my view of things - and people who would qualify as
Church of England communicants. These people may or may not qualify as 'New
Creations' or people saved by Christ (according to the orthodox view of
things.) They may be vague- minded people who have never given much thought
to their own status as 'saved or unsaved sinners.'
As I explain on this page, the law allows the photographing or filming
of people when entering or leaving a church building or taking part in a
church activity in a public place, but since I have a much more restrictive
end in view, obtaining images where I own the copyright and can use them
freely to illustrate this page and perhaps, in some cases, on the Home Page
of this site, I'm happy to take account of representations at the time when
photographs or film footage is taken or later, when they are published - if
they are published. I'm happy to remove images, still or moving, from pages
of the site, but not if the people belong to any of the categories above.
The exception - people who belong to any of the categories but whose
circumstances are very difficult. Images published on the site won't
necessarily stay for long. Such issues as composition, aesthetic
considerations, the overall quality of an image, are factors which are
important to me. This is an aspect of my work which I regard as one of the
less important ones - much less important than the provision of argument and
evidence in verbal form - but which should benefit from the fairly strict
procedures I intend to follow.
As with the pro-Palestinian protesters I photographed and filmed in
2024, claims that I can be stopped from exercising a legally-granted freedom
will get the complainer nowhere. My page
Sheffield
University Camp: the case against has material on photographing /
filming and the law and the drastic reaction of some of the protesters to
being photographed / filmed. The images on the page will show that I was
completely undeterred. The documentation published contributed to the
evidence that the fire risks at the protest camp were very substantial.
Amongst the points I make on the page is this: taking photographs and film
footage using a phone is completely commonplace. Putting a stop to it is
impossible, of course. I've never used a phone to take photographs or to
film - my own mobile phone is a very cheap one, which has these facilties,
but not internet facilities. My main reason for owning a mobile phone is to
get help if my van breaks down.
I use a technically sophisticated camera for taking images.
The 'New Creations' are the clergy and
congregations of churches, or the staff and supporters of church
organizations - the ones who have accepted, or imagine that they have
accepted, Jesus as saviour. These are people of immense importance, with a
deep gulf between themselves and the others, destined for a different fate.
These are people who shouldn't mind in the least if they are photographed
and filmed and if the images are published, but probably will.
I intend to film and take photographs of Church of England clergy and
congregations and Church Army people and people from other Church
organizations and to add still pictures to the site.
I'll avoid taking images of people working in churches and
church organizations in an auxiliary role, such as churchwardens,
caretakers, directors of music, cleaners, treasurers, secretaries, PA's
amongst many others.
I intend to begin taking photographs on or after 1 January 2025
- not before. It may well be some time before any photographs are actually
added to the page.
About this site gives
my policies on use of profiles (and other comments sections) on this site. I
explain that these can be removed in some circumstances, but never in
response to demands to remove the material. The same considerations apply in
the case of photographs - removeable, but not under duress or attempts
at duress.
Realistically, churches and church organizations fairly near to where I live
are the most obvious subjects for 'photographic documentation.' Churches and
church organizations which give me a particular reason for documenting their
people and their activities are a priority.
I hardly ever leave the Sheffield area, but it may well be that I'm able to
obtain footage much further away, on occasion. Visits to churches in the
Oxford, Durham and Carlisle Dioceses are perfectly possible. These are
dioceses which are the subject of extended comment on some pages of the site.
These are the priorities for 'Photo-documentation'
The Church Army, Wilson Carlile Centre
The page, 'Our Team'
https://churcharmy.org/who-we-are/our-team/
is lavishly illustrated with pictures of many, many people. I don't think it
can be claimed that they all belong to 'The Team' and I don't think it can
even be claimed that all the people have staked their claim to salvation
according to the Christian scheme,
but we're obviously led to believe
that these are important people. In my page
Church donations, in the second
column of the page, there's a section 'New Creations Gallery,' which
includes images of assorted Christians.
Christian believers are allegedly Very Important People (even if Bishops
and Archbishops are allegedly even more important). The Church Army Website, like
Church sites in general, doesn't restrict its content to text only. The
Church Army obviously regards images as very important.
I can certainly justify inclusion of images of Christian believers clergy
and congregations and members of Church organizations. My purpose is
obviously very different, my view of these people very different. If they
don't like it, they can present argument and evidence - but I don't think
that would be congenial at all.
St Mark's Church, Broomhill, Sheffield
The Website of St Mark's is far more restrained in its use of
images.
St Mary's Church, Walkley, Sheffield
Likewise the Website of St Mary's, which falls within the St Mark's
small group of churches. This Church does publish regular - weekly -
You Tube videos. Putting the search term St Mary's Church Walkley into the
You Tube search box will quickly locate them. Very wisely, or very
prudently, the videos never seem to show the congregation. Congregations for
the services are very small.
STC, Crookes, Sheffield
The STC Website includes many, many images on
The Home Page
https://www.stcsheffield.org/
The page 'Who we are: our Mission'
https://www.stcsheffield.org/mission
The page Who we are: our Staff Team'
https://www.stcsheffield.org/people
Philadelphia Network Church, Sheffield
Images are provided in far fewer number on the Website, which
includes associate churches
https://ncsheffield.org/#
St John's Church, Ranmoor, Sheffield
This is another church with a Website which is sparsely illustrated,
https://www.stjohnsranmoor.org.uk/
Putting the search term St John's Church Ranmoor into the search
box of Youtube uncovers a number of videos, which seem not to give evidence
of a church with large congregations. The number of page views is very small
- but I don't assume in the least that a large number of views is conclusive
evidence of quality.
Christ Church, Fulwood, Sheffield
https://www.fulwoodchurch.co.uk/newcomers/
and other pages of the site have a selection of photographs.
Sheffield Cathedral
Not surprisingly, the Website of Sheffield Cathedral is big and bloated
(or big and informative, depending on viewpoint.) Browsing will uncover
many, many claims which can't be sustantiated. The page
https://www.sheffieldcathedral.org/ministryteam
is fairly restrained. I hope to be able to publish eventually images of
some Sheffield Cathedral people (but not any of the numerous supporting
staff) if my photography excursions are successful in obtaining worthwhile
and usable results.
New Creations Gallery 2
is in this column, below. It will present
photos taken by me, of clergy and members of Church of England
congregations, and staff members and others connected with the Church Army
and other church organizations - further information in the first
and second columns of the page. Notes on the photos will be provided, giving brief
information. The comments on the individuals mentioned below, none with a
photograph accompanying the text, will be revised and if necessary extended.
I may delete one or more entries.
The New Creations Gallery 1 can be found at Church
Donations None of the photographs are taken by me but copyright
restrictions are observed in the choice of photographs.
The inserts below include images (of a praying man with shadow)
together with names. These will be replaced by
photographs if and when they become available. In most cases, photographs
will be unobtainable and the named
outlines will remain.
Clicking on an image of the praying person with shadow - an image
with a name, not the first image here - will take you to information about
the person / comment on the
person. To go back to top of page, click on 'the rail,' the long, thin band
on the left edge of the page.
Notes on the named outlines
Michael Copeland
From the page
https://stmaryswalkley.co.uk/safeguarding/
The Diocese of Sheffield Safeguarding team can be contacted as follows:
Siân Checkley,
Safeguarding Adviser – m. 07741 013775, sian.checkley@sheffield.anglican.org (Monday
– Thursday)
Elina Penttila, Assistant Safeguarding Adviser – m. 07871 796682, Elina.penttila@sheffield.anglican.org (Monday
– Friday)
Rachel Tankard, Assistant Safeguarding Adviser – m. 07874 859062, rachel.tankard@sheffield.anglican.org (Tuesday,
Wednesday, Friday 9am – 3pm)
The safeguarding policy statement is based on five foundations and offers
six overarching policy commitments:
• Promoting a safer environment and culture
• Safely recruiting and supporting all those with any responsibility related
to children, young people and vulnerable adults within the Church.
• Responding promptly to every safeguarding concern or allegation.
• Caring pastorally for victims/survivors of abuse and other affected
persons.
• Caring pastorally for those who are the subject of concerns or allegations
of abuse and other affected persons.
• Responding to those that may pose a present risk to others.
Our policy on the recruitment of ex-offenders may be found here: Safeguarding
policy on recruitment of ex-offenders
Michael Copeland
It was recently reported in the press that Mr Michael Copeland (aka Cope)
has been sentenced to 16 years for sexual offences committed in Sheffield
during the 1980s and 90s. He was known to attend churches within this
Mission Area. We would urge anyone who is affected by this news to either
contact their Parish Safeguarding Officer or the Diocesan Safeguarding Team.
Mr Copeland left Sheffield around 2016.
https://www.sheffield.anglican.org/support/safeguarding/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/20/church-of-england-gambled-teenager-paedophile-predator/
The first paedophile to be banned from church because he posed a
“significant and real” threat to children was allowed to return to worship
and join a choir, it can be revealed.
For decades, Michael Copeland, 75, targeted young choirboys and admitted
being “addicted to children” culminating in the Church of England barring
him from 200 churches across much of Yorkshire.
Now, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal that Copeland is the scion of a Tory
grandee whose family owned the famous Spode ceramics company and the
Trelissick estate in Cornwall.
In a case that raises serious questions about how the Church safeguards
children, it has emerged that after Copeland moved from Yorkshire to
Cornwall he was allowed to worship at a Cornish church despite senior clergy
knowing he had been banned from South Yorkshire churches.
The paedophile even appears on a church Facebook page seated in the
chancel of the Church of St Feock as a member of its choir in 2018.
This year, he was arrested at his £1.2 million home near Trelissick,
which his grandmother, Ida Copeland, a former Conservative MP, gave to the
National Trust.
He admitted 15 charges of sexually abusing a boy from age eight to
12 in the 1980s and 1990s and was jailed for 16 years in September. It was
the third time he was imprisoned for sexually assaulting young boys. He met
all but one through the church.
From the site 'Beautiful in Jesus: INWARD BEAUTY THROUGH THE WORD,' which
gives a Biblical view of transgression. It avoids and evades any
consideration of transgressions after coming to 'Christ Jesus.' Does the
writer believe that any transgressions committed before coming to Christ,
such as the tronsgressions of Nazis who took part part in the mass
executions of Jewish men, women, children and babies, are forgiven -
'justification by faith, not by works' - but that transgressions committed
after coming to Christ are unforgiven - justification by works, not by
faith? Does the writer believe that the tiny transgressions of people who
never come to Christ are unforgiven, meriting an eternity in Hell? Could the
writer, and all the other believers in this grotesque travesty of justice,
defend their view?
https://beautifulinjesus.com/ephesians-1-forgiven-and-accepted-saints/
As a result of our redemption in Christ Jesus, we are forgiven saints.
Irrespective of the height, breadth and depth of your sins before
coming to Christ; once in Christ, you are forgiven. Though your sins were
red like scarlet, by his blood they are washed away and you become white as
snow (Isaiah
1:18).
The bible states that “the wages of sin is death” (Romans
6:23) and “without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of
sins” (Hebrews
9:22). Jesus paid the price so that you no longer owe God a debt. God
forgives you completely on the basis of Christ’s death on the cross setting
you free from eternal death.
God’s forgiveness towards us is totally unmerited. An extreme and
extravagant act of favor, which He freely lavishes on
us out of His super-abundant love. Therefore, as long as you are in Christ,
there is no reason to hold onto your past sins. God loves you and will not
hold them against you any longer.
It does seem that according to these grotesque views, Michael Copeland
is one of the 'New Creations' whilst his victims, the ones without any
belief in 'Christ Jesus,' are in a vastly different category. The sins of
Michael Copeland are forgiven. The sins of his victims, however, even if
minor, negligible are unforgiven. As I point out in many places, owning
slaves, buying and selling slaves, doesn't feature in the list of sins,
according to the deranged and revolting orthodox Christian view of things.
Many, many 'progressive' Christians share these deranged and revolting
views.
Walkley Parish Church hasn't made it clear where it stands on
these issues, hasn't presented a case. So far as I can see, it's unable to
defend itself. We'll see if it makes any attempt to do that. I hope to be
able to find out the views of ordinary members of the congregation as well
as the 'celebrants of the Eucharist' and preachers who appear at the Church.
In the past, these have included Revd Canon Dr Alan Billings, whose naive
views are discussed at length on this site. I explain why I think that his
influence on policing in South Yorkshire has been disastrously misguided, in
his role as South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner. So far, I've
found him helpless and hapless, completely unable to defend himself or his
views.
The New Archbishop of Canterbury
Whoever may be called to be the next Archbishop of Canterbury, I hope to
offer my comments on the chosen one. The procedure used to choose the next
one will be the same as the procedure used to choose the last one [Justin
Welby].
This was published on the prayerful page of the prayerful Anglican
Communion News Service (September 26, 2012)
https://www.anglicannews.org/news
/2012/09/prayer-for-the-crown-nominations-committee.aspx
A Prayer to be used for the Crown Nominations Committee on the 26th
and 27th September 2012 as they consider the appointment of the new
Archbishop of Canterbury
Almighty God,
you have given your Holy Spirit to the Church
to lead us into all truth:
bless with the Spirit's grace and presence
the members of the Crown Nominations Committee.
Keep them steadfast in faith and united in love,
that they may seek your will, manifest your glory
and prepare the way of your kingdom;
through Jesus Christ your Son our Lord.
Amen.
People on Twitter are being urged to pray for the Crown Nominations
Committee (CNC), as the Committee meets today to consider the appointment of
the new Archbishop of Canterbury.
The hashtag "#prayforthecnc" will be used in messages sent out throughout
the day by the Church of England's Communications office directing people to
a special prayer, which has been posted at the top of this page.
The 16 members of the CNC gather today for a two-day meeting, where they
will decide who to recommend for appointment as the new Archbishop of
Canterbury.
The Church's Director of Communications, the Revd Arun Arora (@revarun),
said: "We know there are lots of people who will be praying for the CNC at
the moment. Over the next two days the CNC will need the gifts of guidance
and wisdom as they together come to a decision. Just as we pray for those we
love and those in need, so we also pray for those who shoulder
responsibility that God will guide and support them."
And God answered their prayers, and it was discerned that Justin Welby was
the answer.
The New Bishop of Durham
Who is the new Bishop of Durham? What has happened? Why no announcement?
Why nothing?
On 11 October 2024 there was shortlisting of the lucky few.
On 26 and 27 November, there were the final interviews. On the same days,
at the Shrine of St Cuthbert, people came and prayed 'for the movement
of the Holy Spirit to be with the appointment panel and the candidates as
the process of discerning the next Bishop of Durham reaches its conclusion
...
The Acting Bishop of Durham and Bishop of Jarrow, the Rt
Revd Sarah Clark, said, 'It is such a gift to be able to tell our hearts
to God in prayer at this special time.”
These very special quotations come from the very special document
https://durhamdiocese.org/diocesan-news/24-hours-of-prayer-for-the-appointment-of-a-new-bishop-of-durham.php)
Will the successful candidate be Anglo-Catholic?
Evangelical? Progressive? Secretly agnostic, even? Whoever has been
appointed, I hope to be able to provide comments.
The New Bishop of Ely
An update from the Bishop of Huntingdon. Brief extracts:
Dear Friends
Some of you will have already seen the announcement released this
morning by the Archbishop
of Canterbury:
Very sadly, at the conclusion of a lengthy process of discernment,
culminating in two days of interviews on 11 and 12 July, the Crown
Nominations Commission considering the nomination of the next Bishop of
Ely has not been able reach the level of consensus required to nominate
a new Diocesan Bishop.
Over the course of the next months, the Crown Nominations Commission
will need to reflect, and make a decision about which stage it wishes to
re-commence the discernment process. This is not likely to be before the
Spring of 2025. Together with the Archbishop of York and others, there
will also need to be a period of reflection on the implications of this
decision on the Church of England more generally ...
Please continue to hold the Diocese of Ely and the discernment of the
Crown Nominations Commission in your prayers.
This is obviously a major disappointment for us all. It is my
understanding that the next Bishop of Ely is unlikely to be in post
before 2026.
Yet we must also remember that it is never good to make an appointment
for the sake of making an appointment.
On behalf of us all, I would like to thank our six members from the
Diocese representing us on the CNC – James, Felicity, Sarah, Alex, Simon
and Christopher – for the time and energy they have invested so far and
for the work yet before them. Please do not press them for details on
what happened and why no nomination could be made ...
Thank you for all your support, and alleluia, on we go!
Good wishes.
+Dagmar
The New Bishop of Carlisle
Archbishop of York Statement on the Crown Nominations Commission for the
next Bishop of Carlisle 15/12/2023
'At the conclusion of a lengthy process of
discernment, culminating in two days of interviews on 13
and 14 December, the Crown Nominations Commission
considering the nomination of the next Bishop of
Carlisle has, very sadly, not been able reach the level
of consensus required to nominate a new Diocesan Bishop.
'Over the course of the next months, the Crown
Nominations Commission will need to reflect, and make a
decision about which stage it wishes to re-commence the
discernment process. This is not likely to be before the
Spring of 2025.
'Bishop Rob Saner-Haigh, the Bishop of Penrith,
will continue serving as acting Diocesan Bishop
alongside the senior leadership team in the Diocese of
Carlisle.
"Please continue to hold the Diocese of Carlisle
and the discernment of the Crown Nominations Commission
in your prayers.'
Dr Tim Ling.
'Director of Organisational Development at the Church Army. He provides
strategic oversight for the work of the Research Unit.' Material
on Dr Ling on the pages
Church Army
Church Integrity
Church Documents
Matt Barlow is the current CEO (Chief Executive Officer) of the Church Army.
He took up office on 5 November 2024.
According to a Press Release, he joins the organization at a 'crucial
moment in our mission to share the good news of the gospel with the
increasing number of people living in poverty and deprivation.' As a matter
of strict fact, it's the welfare state, funded by wealth creation and
taxation, which supports people. The poverty and deprivation to be found now
are comparative, nothing like the poverty and deprivation of past centuries
or even the last century. The Church Army is adept at tugging at the heart
strings with its grossly misleading propaganda images and messages, urging
people to give, to give, to give, again and again and again. A look at the
Church Army Website will confirm this. The sub-text, the hidden agenda, is
concealed. It's concealed in the claim 'to share the good news of the gospel
... '
The gospel is only good news to people without the capacity to realize that
the good news is strictly rationed. Only the people the Church Army (or
other indoctrination agencies) convert will have 'good' outcomes. The Church
Army believes that the poor and deprived in this country, the people living
in extreme poverty and deprivation in other countries, have very bad
outcomes - they are damned.
What does Matt Barlow believe? Could he challenge this version? Does he
believe that only the people who accept Christ as Saviour are saved? Is this
the 'Good News' of the Gospel?
Dr Alan Billings
Former South Yorkshire Police and
Crime Commissioner, fairly frequent preacher / celebrant at St Mary's
Church, Walkley, Sheffield. Material on Dr Billings on the pages
Church Donations
Complaints
Dr Miranda Threlfall-Holmes
Archdeacon of Liverpool.
There are no mentions of Dr Threlfall-Holmes on other pages of the site. The
information on this page is correspondingly longer.
The Archdeacon is a public figure, the subject of quite an extensive
Wikipedia page,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_Threlfall-Holmes
There's a section 'Campaigning and national roles' which includes this,
'In
March 2024, Threlfall-Holmes posted on X (formerly Twitter) calling for
“anti whiteness” in society, a post which provoked major controversy, with
her comments being criticized as "racist" and "divisive". She later told The
Telegraph:
“I was contributing to a debate about world views, in which ‘whiteness’ does
not refer to skin colour per se, but to a way of viewing the world where
being white is seen as ‘normal’ and everything else is considered different
or lesser."
The page
https://www.stmarkssheffield.co.uk/Groups/
410736/Lent_Groups.aspx
gives a photograph of Dr Threlfall-Holmes which makes it clear that
although she called for 'anti whiteness' in society, the Archdeacon is white
herself. She gave a talk at St Mark's Church, Broomhill, Sheffield in
connection with her book, 'How to Eat Bread.' If she ever comes to St Mark's
again, I may be able to take a photograph - in a public place, not inside
the church, obviously - but it's not very likely.
This is yet another Church Functionary with a
doctorate awarded for an ecclesiastical research topic. In the case of Dr
Threlfall-Holmes, this was '"Monks
and markets: Durham Cathedral-Priory, 1460-1520.'
My own personal experience is limited to some
exchanges of emails with the Archdeacon. I've found her a tedious
person but other people may well have a far more charitable view, perhaps
one of respect or admiration.
Malcolm Chamberlain
is another
Archdeacon, in the Sheffield Diocese. He is responsible for, he
perpetrated, it seems, this, which vividly illustrates the problem, the
prevalence of
The reason for appointing these people is this:
' ... the intention is to create a collaborative context
that enables Deaneries, Parishes and Mission Areas to embrace significant
change.'
Fergus Butler-Gallie
is now at St Mary's and All Saints, Charlbury with Shorthampton, in
Oxfordshire. The Oxford Diocese is one of the dioceses singled out for
special attention on this site, but for the time being, coverage of the
Oxford Diocese is very sparse.
A much longer section will be needed to do justice to his strengths - and
weaknesses - but simple categorization wouldn't be adequate in his case. He
has a light-heartedness and lightness, to an extent, missing (in my experience) in so many
of the NEW CREATIONS. He has complexities missing in so many - but how far
do these complexities take him? I intend to make the effort to arrive at
answers. I don't know his work well enough yet to come to even preliminary
conclusions about his awareness of what is to me a central aspect of the
history of the Church of England -the cruelty perpetrated during those
centuries.
Of course, although the Church of England has a long history, it isn't
as long as all that. It's extended again and again in reputable /
shamelessly disreputable sources such as histories of the chapels of the
older Oxford and Cambridge colleges, or, to mention a few further instances,
histories of Durham which include 'the Northern Saints' and histories
of the diocese of Ely which mention St Etheldreda. The fact is that St Cuthbert, the Anglo-Saxon
pseudo-Saint, wasn't a Church of England man and St Etheldreda wasn't a
Church of England lady.
Fergus Butler-Gallie has written a sensitive article, 'Why Remembrance is a privilege
as much as a duty' for 'The Spectator.'
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-remembrance-is-a-privilege-as-much-as-a-duty/
At least, the part I've read is written with sensitivity. I haven't been
able to read the whole article because I'm not a subscriber to 'The
Spectator' any longer. I was for many years but I became tired of the
frequency of publication of articles which assumed that Christian religion
and the Church of England versions of realities appeared. I was never an
admirer of the magazine. I had a much higher opinion of 'The Daily
Telegraph' and used to buy the print edition most days of the week, for year
after year. I stopped buying it for the same reasons - uncritical articles
on Christian religion and the Church of England. I do subscribe to the
online edition. The material on the Church continues to be feeble. I've no
need to give the evidence here - it would be impossible to give adequate
evidence here. It's available in large quantity in pages of this site.
I'm a strong believer in many things, but it so happens that Christianity
and the Church of England aren't amongst them. I'm a strong believer in
supporting print publication. I won't be buying any of Fergus Butler-Gallie's
books, though. There are too many demands on my reading time, too many
demands on my time in general. I'll take these restrictions on my knowledge
of his work into account in writing more about this interesting member of
the clergy - who appears to believe in the central uninteresting, not to say
harmful doctrines - not deeply harmful but shallow and harmful.
