The Church of England has issued a new course aimed at providing a basic resource for catechesis – that is, nurturing people in Christian faith. Hardly controversial, one might think. The course was launched a few days ago and it provoked some media interest.
I haven't read what the Times seems to have published this evening (but gleaned from what is being said on Twitter), but it would appear that in a phone interview I gave this afternoon I said that there is no point trying to convert anyone anymore because the people of England have gone too far away from the faith.
Well, how interesting. Compare what the Times seems to be saying with what I actually said.
The new resource is called Pilgrim. It starts from an assumption that people know little, rather than that they already know a lot about Christian faith. This is clearly a strong point and one I illustrated from when I ran 'Open to Question' courses in my parish in Leicestershire in the 1990s. We need to assume little knowledge these days, use language that is appropriate to this changed situation, and enable all people – including those who have been Christians for a while but are not confident – to enagage in such a course without fear of being embarrassed.
Many such courses work on the same basis – that it is better to be as inclusive as possible and speak a language everyone can understand.
OK so far?
I then went on to say that religious illiteracy is an issue – that one cannot any longer (even in preaching) allude to a biblical story without telling it. Academics complain that students of art, literature and history have so little basic understanding of (or familiarity with) biblical stories or language that they simply cannot begin to understand … er … art, history or literature.
Controversial?
So, how does this get translated into the Church of England giving up on evangelism – when the whole point of such courses as Pilgrim is to evangelise and catechise?
How does an observation about the challenge of religious or biblical illiteracy become a surrender instead of a creative challenge – which Pilgrim takes up with creative imagination?
I will read the piece tomorrow and see how (apart from Twitter) I have been reported. If the Twittersphere is right, I will respond with a piece on media literacy.
Posted with Blogsy
Nick Baines's Blog 
October 2, 2013 at 11:27 pm
This is the actual quote from the Times article:
‘The Bishop of Bradford, the Right Rev Nick Baines, said: “Despite the way RE is taught, I would say there is widespread religious illiteracy. People do not know the Bible. How can you understand art, European history and Shakespeare if you do not know the basics of Christianity? It is a fair assumption now that most people actually know very little. The Church is wise in wanting to reach a wide range of people.” ‘
October 2, 2013 at 11:30 pm
Gillan, then that is a fair summary quote. I will also need to see the context in which it is set. But, I have no quarrel with this. Thanks for quoting directly.
October 2, 2013 at 11:41 pm
At the start of the article it says that the Church of England has admitted that the country has become a nation that knows almost nothing about Christianity and that there is no point any more attempting to convert anyone.
This bit is not true and a very poor and misleading reading of the bit on the Pilgrim website which says that the course ‘approaches the great issues of faith not through persuasion, but participation.’
The rest of the article is mainly quotes with a very irritating one by Terry Sanderson of the National Secular Society, but what else would you expect.
Definite slap on the wrist for Ruth Gledhill on this piece.
October 2, 2013 at 11:47 pm
Gillan, I think this angle is utter nonsense and not a conclusion that can be derived from the presentation of the material (as I made clear to Ruth). Terry Sanderson is utterly predictable and we could write his quotes for him.
October 3, 2013 at 12:58 am
And you expect them to report what you ACTUALLY said?!
Lazy journalism as sadly is often the case with religious affairs and that is not Christian paranoia….
October 3, 2013 at 5:21 am
The Church of England cannot even educate its own priests in Biblical Studies. My former rector regularly confused his texts, for instance the parable of the workers in the vineyard, with that of the two sons asked to help their father in the vineyard. In ensuring that the church reaches out to all sorts and conditions, is it in danger of returning to the days of Wycliffe’s ploughboy, who knew more scripture than the Latin clerics? I recently challenged a priest publicly over his advocacy of Gay marriage within the church, asking him to discuss Matthew 19 with me. He refused to do so, saying it was not necessary to address the biblical texts on the issue. Has Anglicanism outlived itself as the state religion in England, since it seems to be based on anything but the gospel in its drive to be all things to all people?
October 3, 2013 at 8:26 am
Surprised there hasn’t been a comment from Ruth Gledhill yet. Haven’t seen her article ‘cos unfortunately The Times doesn’t make it available on line without charge.
October 3, 2013 at 11:26 am
Hi, thank you for this Nick and for speaking to me yesterday. Before speaking to you I had spent 24 hours trying to get hold of one of the four authors of Pilgrim without success. I would have loved to speak to Bishop Croft or one of the others, but sadly they were not available. The quote from Bishop Croft that appears in the article came from the video on the website. I do believe that with the continuing decline in Christian adherence, as reflected in the Census, it is important to represent the views of organisations such as the National Secular Society.
October 3, 2013 at 1:31 pm
[…] take much for the Chinese whispers to develop. Even the Bishop of Bradford, Nick Baines, put out a blog post defending himself after giving a quote for the piece worrying that the part on there being no point […]
February 18, 2014 at 9:43 am
One thing that is certainly true, the country as a whole know very little about bibliclal Christianity. But who is at fault, is not this a failure of the church which so often concentrates on insignicant things and gets involved in all kind of debates. while at the same time neglecting the most most important question man’s eternal destiny, we need to be proclaiming the glorious Gospel message from a biblical standpoint, which is our only source of authority.
The commission of the Church is to proclaim the gospel message and make disciples teaching them to observe all things (Matt 28;19-20)