Well blow me down, Ruth Gledhill has written just about the only sensible article on the Wycliffe affair. Now, lets be clear - The Times has had a job to win me over after a frankly appalling article on the Sydney diocese a few years back (was it 20+ factual errors? I forget: it was basically copied it out of a hatchet job in Theology by a chap called Humphrey Southern). But this piece is a professional piece of journalism that doesn't make opinion into fact (Stephen Bates' stock-in-trade). Amazing!
IMPORTANT CORRECTION: the offending article was NOT written by Ruth Gledhill as I originally claimed but by her colleague Mary Ann Sieghart. It is a true shocker (a 'Barry Crocker' as we call it back home). See for yourself:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/mary_ann_sieghart/article830129.ece
2 comments:
It certainly seems spot on to me. When as man stands up and says
1. Evangelicals have got to take care about the training of future vicars and make sure that they receive sound doctrine
2. That if we want this we are going to have to fund it
3. That our priority is that of evangelism and a reminder that hell is real -that's why evangelism matters
Then no doubt he as a human will have his own sins and weakness es but he sounds basically on the right lines to me (indeed is saying no more than what the other Jensens have been trying to tell us for years!).
Indeed the reaction of others against that tells us more about thme than it does about Wycliffe
Ah the infamous Times report. Yes, it has been disappointing at Oak Hill, I was expecting a full scale fundamentalist training, military exercises, being sent off on secret missions to take over other churches and colleges. Maybe that's what you get to do in third year whilst everyone else is busy doing quite "boring things" like lectures and Hebrew vocab and watching the West Wing!
Post a Comment