Christian Unions

28 Responses to “Christian Unions”

1. Chris Clark says:
   

   Sorry I think sometimes you are bit too laisez-faire Dave…

   It is short step from banning a CU with a distinct (and maybe suspect) statement of faith to other things being banned

   First they came for the Jews
   and I did not speak out
   because I was not a Jew.
   Then they came for the Communists
   and I did not speak out
   because I was not a Communist.
   Then they came for the trade unionists
   and I did not speak out
   because I was not a trade unionist.
   Then they came for me
   and there was no one left
   to speak out for me.

   Pastor Martin Niemöller

   November 23rd, 2006 at 11:52 am
2. joe says:
   

   Hahahaha… that is so true – the AB of Y is probably not ‘sound’ enough to speak at many CUs.

   November 23rd, 2006 at 12:03 pm
3. Rick says:
   

   You mention MethSoc, AngSoc etc as other student bodies but you neglected some others:

   The AnClSoc (More Anglo-Catholic, pronounced Ankle-Soc)
   The NeSoc (Devoted to Neitsch)
   The ASoc (Dilbert fans)…

   and for the really liberal thinkers – the WoolenSoc….

   I’ll get my coat…..

   November 23rd, 2006 at 12:32 pm
4. David says:
   

   It’s worth taking a look at Yellow’s blog on this issue. He’s a University chaplain and has some choice things to say on the matter. A good read.

   November 23rd, 2006 at 12:46 pm
5. Emma says:
   

   I went to a pleasantly small university (well college actually, but it will be a university soon) and I think one of its strengths was the fact that it did not have hundreds and hundreds of different Christian groups. This meant that the CU was more broadly balanced and (don’t tell UCCF) I was on the committee and never even saw a doctrinal basis never mind signed it… There was still the odd scuffle with the SU though. Heigh ho, we had a chapel to worship in anyway.

   November 23rd, 2006 at 1:14 pm
6. Dave K says:
   

   Neitsch?

   I feel a dispute coming on between NeSoc and SpellSoc / LitSoc / PhilSoc.

   November 23rd, 2006 at 1:21 pm
7. Liz says:
   

   Dave – loving your work my friend! Last couple of cartoons have particularly amused me.

   Thanks for the link to Yellow’s blog David, an interesting read and echoes some of my thoughts.

   I suppose my own take is: if you want to rigididly and narrowly define yourself as being one particular form of christianity, then that’s fine and lovely. Similarly if you want to control and confine your policies and structures in a rigid way that fits with your doctrinal convictions, then equally that’s up to you.

   BUT when you make those choices don’t expect a) the rest of the Christian tradition to be delighted that you claim through attitude and title to represent the full spectrum when you don’t, and b) when those choices fly in the face of equal opportunity policies of another body don’t whinge that they ain’t so keen on being affiliated.

   I suspect that as Yellow says the fit between religous practice and Student Unions is probably a very poor one, doomed to these kind of problems. Perhaps as Christians then, rather than whinging about some form of persecution we should be grateful that we more than many other religous groups who face a similar dilemma tend to have an alternative called the chaplaincy.

   Which in turn would leave the SU free to do what it does best, as Yellow puts it:

   “This also takes the SU away from religion and back to what they do best. Heavy drinking, extreme ironing and comedy nights.”

   November 23rd, 2006 at 2:25 pm
8. Tiffer says:
   

   I’v already said my piece on this – so I wont repeat myself – however it is a brilliant cartoon Dave, and I am seriously wondering what the UCCF thinks about all these wooly liberals/catholics standing up for them!

   November 23rd, 2006 at 2:49 pm
9. Phillip Fayers says:
   

   The University I went to (Kent) back in the late 80′s had the same situation as you describe.

   The CU was not permitted to be an official Students Union society because they went against the rules of conduct which the SU required. Ie. The CU didn’t vote in its leadership and it restricted its membership to those willing to sign a statement of faith.

   I think this situation is being over-egged. It seems to be too easy to find Christians who leap up and complain of being persecuted.

   November 23rd, 2006 at 3:50 pm
10. Tiffer says:
    

    I take it back – the official blurb on the UCCF website – and Dave it is a list of the Bishops who signed it – Willesdon is no surprise!

    http://www.uccf.org.uk/news/supportersnews.php?NewsID=1311

    seems fairly ok about the Bishops helping them. Then again this reminds me of when it happened at Warwick, and the Chaplain helping them out in court, which was interesting as he couldn’t sign the DB. Perhaps they believe someone can be sound when doing something but not when saying something.

    Although it doesn’t mention the ABC.

    November 23rd, 2006 at 4:04 pm
11. Dave says:
    

    Thanks Tiffer for this – though thinking about it I think I did see that list somewhere in one of the news reports.

    “The Anglican bishops of Winchester, Rochester, Chester, Southwell and Nottingham, Lichfield, Dover and Willesden, together with the Roman Catholic church’s lead Bishop on Higher Education, are joined as signatories by academics and representatives from national Christian organisations.”

    I wonder who the ‘representatives from national Christian organisations’ are.

    Have added extra links to main post this afternoon.

    November 23rd, 2006 at 4:11 pm
12. Rob says:
    

    I particulaarly enjoyed Yellow’s comments about “eating the swine food of SU politics”: yup, that’s just about how I remember it.

    Anyway, my ha’pennyworth on this subject (which isn’t worth tuppance)is a reflection on my time in Angsoc at Birmingham University and my time in the Mountaineering Club at the University of Ulster.

    Firstly, at Brum, the BUECU (E for evangelical, but sometimes claimed to be for ecumenical, har har) refused to recognise the legitimacy of Angsoc, Cathsoc, Methsoc or indeed the legitimacy of any of the Chaplains. When asked why, we were told that none of us had made the declaration of faith.
    We mentioned the Apostles’ Creed, only to be met with a response of “What’s that?”.

    As to the Mountaineering club bit: the CU at UU was actually seeking to affiliate with the SU at the time. There were suggestions that they discriminated against non-Christians (or indeed non-protestants) and so should not be allowed to join. But one response – rather brilliant in my mind – was that surely they discriminated against non Christians in the same way that the Mountaineering Club discriminated against wind-surfers.

    It was true: we certainly wouldn’t stop windsurfers from joining us, or indeed coming on any of our expedition. However, if they did not find our activities to their liking, they probably wouldn’t come back.

    There was a point to this, but it has temporarily escaped me. Feel free to draw your own conclusions.

    November 23rd, 2006 at 4:14 pm
13. MadPriest says:
    

    As a middle of the road, suburban Anglican priest I spend years trying to get our teenagers to give themselves permission to think for themselves. You’re just about winning when they clear off to university and get preyed on by CUs and Jesmond Parish Church type churches who undo all the work you’ve put in. It’s hard enough keeping them safe from predators like Youth For Christ whilst they’re growing up but, at least, you’re there with them to explain what’s going on.

    So yes, I despise them as I despise anything that attacks the Gospel of Christ.

    November 23rd, 2006 at 7:05 pm
14. Richard says:
    

    I’m probably biased, as it’s my old Uni, but Reading University seem to have the relationship sorted. This from the CU side, and this from the President of the Student Union.

    That process allowed us to agree that for the CU membership in the SU was not vital, and that the SU could nevertheless provide some facilities to the CU because of the two organisations’ friendship (given certain provisos).

    November 24th, 2006 at 12:09 am
15. joe says:
    

    May I say that I heartily disapprove of the illness of accusing others of being unchristian/predators/attacking the Gospel of Christ.

    I have heard more than enough of this language attacking RCs/liberals/the-whole-world-and-his-dog and frankly I am rather sad that others have decided to descend to the gutter. Just because others are being intolerant doesn’t mean we have to join them in their delusion.

    Most people I met at Christian Unions were very nice, honest people. Most people I’ve met at YfC and UCCF are genuine. I don’t agree with them on many things, but the test of being a proper christian does not lie with me and my insecurities but before the throne of God.

    Frankly, we are not going to build a better world if we engage in mutual finger-stabbing.

    November 24th, 2006 at 9:27 am
16. Dave says:
    

    I’m in agreement with Joe here.

    “I don’t agree with them on many things, but the test of being a proper christian does not lie with me and my insecurities but before the throne of God.”

    Indeed.

    November 24th, 2006 at 9:36 am
17. Claire says:
    

    It probably shouldn’t do anymore but it does amaze me the pickle and stew that we Christians get ourselves into about such things as these. That’s not to belittle it necessarily, but I do wonder what could happen to the world if we put all the energy into telling others about Jesus, and living out a life for him that we do into worrying about how we’re presented in the press.

    I’m sure there may be some who think that’s over simplified but …

    November 24th, 2006 at 9:53 am
18. jody says:
    

    claire, I really am a simple soul

    but there’s something in me that likes a good debate too – those things war it out sometimes
    :-~

    jody

    November 24th, 2006 at 11:34 am
19. MadPriest says:
    

    I really think we should stop calling water, wet. Although all the evidence and all our personal experience of water points to it being wet we must not mention it. In fact, anybody who mentions that water is wet is guilty of acute wetness anxiety and is doing nothing more than projecting their own wetness on to the water. Furthermore, such people are obviously, unlike most people in the world, opinionated, in fact, self-opinionated.

    Even though our children may stray into water and in some cases drown, this is not because the water is wet or that the water in any way contributed to the drowning situation. Anybody who attempts to stop children from entering the water because of their own insecurities concerning the false drowning properties of water, are blatantly stopping water from expressing itself and so are attacking the basic rights of water.

    So, please, remember the motto of the Church of England, which has protected us from forming an opinion over so many years:

    “IGNORE IT, AND PERHAPS IT WILL GO AWAY!”

    November 24th, 2006 at 12:16 pm
20. joe says:
    

    Don’t be stupid, MadPriest.

    CUs and Evangelicals churches are not filled with demons – just broken, messed-up people like everyone else. They are not a force for evil, get over yourself.

    The line between good and evil does not fall between you and I, me and the evangelical church, them and us but through every human heart

    November 24th, 2006 at 12:44 pm
21. Serena says:
    

    MadPriest – I sympathise with your anger. My brother has just started at the same university I’ve just left, and I was petrified that, in his zeal and enthusiasm, he would fall in with the CU much as I did, and then either experience the pain and anger of having to leave, or end up a bigotted zealot. Thankfully, the fact that he’s studying theology seems to have engaged his brain, but I worry about many of my friends who are more willing to swallow the first DB thrown at them.

    On the other hand, I suppose CUs should be allowed to preach what they like and claim to be Christians – they just shouldn’t be allowed to claim that they are the ONLY Christians and represent the broad spectrum of Christian beliefs and opinions. More honesty and less prevaricating is needed, and perhaps from this point of view the current debate is a Good Thing.

    November 24th, 2006 at 12:50 pm
22. Paul says:
    

    At the risk of making myself feel very old, my observation of my three kids – all either at or just left the same university I went to – is that there do seem to be rather more very closed conservative types about now than there were nearly thirty years ago – and that depressingly some of the issues I thought were done and dusted back then are still being keenly argued about.

    On the other hand the sub text of some of the posts here, that evangelicals are by definition a problem seems rather less than open-minded. On the basis of just this thread, there only seems to one bigoted zealot posting, and he doesn’t sound like an evo to me.

    Oh and one of the gentlest, most sensitive, pastoral men I’ve had the privilege to know worked for several years in a senior role with Youth for Christ…

    November 24th, 2006 at 4:30 pm
23. MadPriest says:
    

    Paul, thank you. The problem we have in Newcastle Upon Tyne with Youth For Christ is that they put on huge events in the City Hall and then don’t police them properly. The predator churches use these events to get at young people who have just gone along for the worship and music.

    One young lady from my church who was got at by these people, the day she left said to me that she wasn’t getting anything from my church anymore. To which I replied that it wasn’t really about what we get out of church but what we put into it. She still left, of course. I have to look after the older people as well, I can’t just cherry pick young, affluent pop music lovers.

    It doesn’t matter how many people tell me to get over it – the problem is real and it is always evangelicals causing the problem.

    November 24th, 2006 at 9:13 pm
24. JP says:
    

    It sounds like American-style fundamentalists are getting established in the UK.

    You have my aympathies.

    November 25th, 2006 at 1:23 am
25. Tiffer says:
    

    It is only evangelicals in your area – it is often quite the opposite elsewhere. Certain very liberal areas of the states being good examples.

    I think putting on large events and not ensuring youth don’t come into contact with other youth who go to bigger churches than theirs really puts YFC in the “predators” section. That’s more about false teachers and cults.

    In my sending church when the youth get too old to be in Sunday school they start teaching sunday school, (around 12) and when they get too old for that or get bored of it they either go to uni or they go to the local non conformist church – because it has a lot of youth. They are no way near in line with our theology (too cons evo) but they have something our youth want and we give our blessing in that. Until we can come up with a youth strategy (we are working on it) that is better for them than just coming along to the odd sunday service and maybe church social. Of course one of the problems is that if they keep going to the other church then we won’t ever have any youth, but that’s the vicious cycle I suppose.

    I don’t agree with the way my church does it nec, but I admire their freedom in allowing people to go where they need to go – but being there for them when they decide it isn’t for them or it all goes wrong – and we have a few people from that church who left for various reasons as well. The relationship between the churches is very good – much better than with other anglican churches who are not in communion I might add.

    November 25th, 2006 at 2:27 am
26. David Keen says:
    

    If the Newscastle events are badly policed, perhaps Madpriest and some of his congregation could offer to help steward it?

    Confession: I was a C.U. secretary at uni, and signed the doctrinal basis, though there were bits of it that I affirmed slightly less heartily than others. It provided a great place for getting stuck into the Bible, and for forming the disciplines of personal prayer and Bible study, prayer for ones friends, and trying to be a witness to Christ.

    Unfortunately, the combination of the intensity of university life, the intensity of CU life, and my own driven personality meant that I was probably a real pain to most people, butt-clenchingly keen to believe and do the right things. I hope I’ve chilled a bit since then.

    1 other thing to contribute: almost everyone at university believes that their way of being Christian is the best way, if not the only authentic way. Hands up (lets be honest now), anyone who still thinks that way?

    November 25th, 2006 at 9:27 am
27. Mary says:
    

    If we didn’t think our way of Christian was best, then presumably we’d be doing what we thought WAS best? Still, I see your point.

    I’ve been damned to hell on a number of occasions, sometimes just based on the denomination I was. I’ve been asked to justify my beliefs on a number of occasions, by Christians who just want to start a debate with me, and convert me to their way of thinking. And if they demolish my argument, and pull what I believe to bits then they feel they’ve won – that they’ve demonstrated their way is best. And if I choose not to debate with them, then I don’t have the courage of my convictions.

    On the other hand, I’ve come across what I would term true Christians, who accept that while we might differ in how we worship our Lord, on the important stuff we are agreed. And what is that important stuff?

    That we love the Lord with all our heart, strength and mind, and we love our neighbour.

    Not easy, but while we are striving to do that, hopefully people will see the light of Christ in us and respond to that.

    November 25th, 2006 at 1:08 pm
28. John Bennett says:
    

    The UCCF basis doctrinal basis says, “The Bible, as originally given, is the inspired and infallible Word of God.” Does this mean that it is only infallible in the original language if so why are C.U. members allowed to read it in translation?

    November 25th, 2006 at 6:08 pm