Like this? Share it on social media. Join our monthly e-newsletter to keep up to date with our latest research and events. And check out our Friends Programme to find out how you can help our work.
With the election of the new Pope and the enthronement of Archbishop Justin Welby coming within a week of one another, the church stands in a significant (and historically unique) position. On the one hand, there have been child sex abuse scandals, ecclesiastical cover-ups, and falling congregations, each posing an enormous challenge in its own way. On the other, there has been a severe breakdown in public trust in public institutions – banks, Parliament, police, media, even the NHS – all of which present an opportunity for the church to speak into society. Is Christianity at a crossroads?
This was the theme upon which four panellists – Catholic theologian, Dr. Anna Rowlands; Vicar of St Martin-in-the-Fields, Revd Canon Samuel Wells; former Conservative MP, Matthew Parris; and author Sarah Dunant – debated on Monday evening in front of an invited audience at Methodist Central Hall in a Theos/BBC Radio 4 debate chaired by John Humphrys, entitled ‘Christianity at the Crossroads’
The debate begun with John Humphrys addressing the title question to Samuel Wells, who compared the church to the Old Testament figures of David and Goliath. Historically, the church had become like the large and sluggish Goliath, but now had the opportunity to adopt the role of the smaller, nimbler and more hopeful David. Parris portrayed the position of the church in a different way; rather than being at a crossroads it was facing a ‘long withdrawing roar’, a trend of long-term decline. By contrast, Rowlands spoke of Christianity as a faith that was, and should always be, at a ‘crossroads’.
In light of this, three particular topics were debated: celibacy, woman bishops, and moral authority. Dunant underscored both the difficulty and dangers of a celibate lifestyle, in particular regard to the sex abuse scandals. Rowlands argued against this, with reference to research that denied that celibacy led to a distortion of sexuality. Speaking from the audience, Jack Valero from Opus Dei agreed with Rowlands, citing the John J. Report as evidence.
On the question of female bishops, both Sam Wells and Rose Hudson-Wilkin (Speaker’s Chaplain and vicar of Hackney in London, speaking from the floor) stressed that the church is deprived for not accepting females into the episcopacy. Yet whilst the church had not yet accepted the institution of female bishops, it had acted as a “reconciled community” according to Wells, making the decision as a single body when speaking into the congregation and society, something about which he was not ashamed.
The debate then turned from specific cases to the broader question of moral authority. John Humphrys asked whether we need God to have morality. Parris answered that we do not, pointing to secular humanists who lived morally in support. Humphrys then went further to ask whether Parris believed in any sort of ‘moral absolute’, to which Parris responded that he did not, and challenged anyone who did to present him with a list of morals that were unchanging in time and place. Parris then turned the question upside down and asked ‘can we have morality with God?’ Surely we should show kindness and love because it is the right thing to do- not because of Christ or the threat of Hell? By acting in reference to these things morality is ‘cheapened’, he argued.
Rowlands responded to this, recasting the idea of ‘Christ’ into the framework of human dignity. To love someone as Christ is not to obliterate their personhood, but to acknowledge it in the strongest terms. Furthermore, this belief in human dignity acts as a motivating factor, the fuel that promulgates morality. Dunant drew the debate around moral authority to a close, saying that ‘feminism’ was her equivalent of the ‘faith’ to which Rowlands had referred, and (again, in agreement with Rowlands) portrayed secular and Christian morality not as polarised sets of ethics, but ethics which could enrich one another.
Dunant used this opportunity to direct the debate towards society. Addressing Parris, Dunant highlighted the state of society, which she described as in bad shape. This observation, made in particular reference to banking reforms, contextualised the position of the church. The shortcomings and opportunities of the church are to be seen in light of a society which had also fallen short, and should also be taking opportunities to reform.
With this the final question was asked: what ‘hope’ did each of the panellists have for the future of the church and society? For Wells, the hope was in overcoming isolation. It was in gestures of interdependence and community that joy could be found. For Rowlands, it was the hope for a positive and constructive grammar to be developed around real hope. For Dunant, potential could be found in the words ‘kindness’ and ‘charity’, although she emphasised alongside this the severity of the challenges facing both society and the church, saying that her hope lay in the younger generation. Finally, Parris said he found his ‘hope’ in the individual, their liberty and voice, bringing the debate to a close with the words “I believe in people and I believe in the world, and on balance I think it might just turn out alright.”
Chloë McNaught
Image by Yakir from pixabay.com available in the public domain.
