Perhaps I should start renaming this blog “the Williams files”. But, to be frank, once you start looking at what this man actually says in the public arena the more disappointed Christians, and especially Anglicans, should be.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams‘, latest public speaking event was a series a dialogues at St Paul’s Cathedral in London.
The first dialogue was entitled “The Worlds We Live In; How Should The World Be Governed?” and was with Professor Philip Bobbitt and Lord David Owen, so this was heavy stuff. You can read the dialogue here.
So, again, our question is “what will Williams say?”.
Bear in mind, this is the man who, his very own website says, is “regarded as the nation’s senior Christian and spiritual voice”.
So, we have to ask, how does Williams do at being a Christian and spiritual voice?
If you go through the dialogue you’ll find that Williams mentions the following words this many times:
Christ: never
Jesus: never
Son (as in Son of God): never
God: never
now, perhaps Williams is just being a “spiritual” voice on this occasion. Think so? Here’s the scorecard
Spirit/spiritual: never
Religion/religious: once, in the context of religion being the source of or solution to conflict.
“Christian” gets one reference wrt the Muslim/Christian dialogue that he went to recently and promptly denied the faith at.
Now, one doesn’t want to deny that Williams is incredibly clever and on this occassion actually communicates himself clearly. But he’s the Archbishop of Canterbury for goodness sake!!!
He’s there to tell the gospel to the world. He’s there to announce that God is creator and sustainer of the Cosmos.
There is a Christian response and view on world government. There is the truth that all government is put in place by God (Romans 13) and that God laughs at the attempts of human princes to rule the world for themselves (Psalm 2). There is the truth that we are all, whether pauper or Prime Minister, accountable to Him.
Above all, there’s simply the opportunity to tell the world about God revealed in the Lord Jesus Christ. I don’t care how he does it, he doesn’t need to do a 2 Ways to Live presentation. He just needs to do his job and tell the nation and the world – even just the audience who are there with him – about the Lord Jesus Christ, the ruler of the Universe.
Does he do it? Will he ever do it?
Jesus said, “where your treasure is, there your heart is also”.
In the same vein, I would want to add, “what you talk about reveals what you care about”.
Williams seems to talk very little about the Lord Jesus Christ.
Shame on you. You do yourself a great dis-service by trashing your brothers in such a way. Your words “what you talk about reveals what you care about” – can be levelled at you and I am more disappointed in your approach than anything else. It makes me want to run a mile.
At least David is prepared to stand up and be counted when he gives his criticism rather than hide behind anonymity.
<M>
well, they work at UBSWarburg in London. Perhaps they might like to let us know who they are?
perhaps you might like to leave a name?
Are you suggesting that no one should speak out for the truth when the man who is supposed to be representing Christ’s church fails in his duty? that false teaching should not be exposed? that, in fear of appearing to “trash” someone we should neglect to rebuke where it is necessary?
Certainly saying “what you talk about reveals what you care about” can be turned against the speaker. But if we are Christians here, or at least, as I hope, not hypocrites, why should that be a bad thing?
Yeah sorry about anon postings – i feel the need to preserve myself. Maybe that makes me gutless but I have my reasons.
I get so upset when hearing things like this said about Rowan Williams as I happen to think he is wonderful – and his teaching has really really helped me.
Now. You are not going to agree with the style and theology of every christian under the sun but can’t you try and find the middle ground?
That depends. If person A is teaching truth and person B is teaching falsehood, is “finding the middle ground” a good thing?
If person A has a balanced diet and person B only ever eats chocolate, is “finding the middle ground” a good thing?
<M>