Ruth Harley
banner
ruthh.bsky.social
Ruth Harley
@ruthh.bsky.social
Vicar in Newcastle. PhD student at York St John: feminist ecclesiology and women's vocations. Apparently I'm "surprisingly orthodox"!
They are very much not the same thing. One is a legally defined part of the church's structures (however much some of us may wish it weren't). The other is a made up thing. And yes, the conflation of the two is very deliberate. And very disingenuous.
November 12, 2025 at 10:07 PM
Oh, this again. There is nothing I can say about that scheme that would be becoming to a Clerk in Holy Orders.
a woman wearing glasses is saying i say nothing .
ALT: a woman wearing glasses is saying i say nothing .
media.tenor.com
November 12, 2025 at 10:05 PM
Obviously not. Where in the HoB Declaration could anyone possibly find anything to suggest that would be anywhere near being within the remit of its provisions??? One to refer to the Independent Reviewer for sure.
November 12, 2025 at 9:13 PM
Although at least they know about the lake at Salisbury. The word "might" is never reassuring from an architect. As in "the persistent damp might be caused by an unmapped underground spring, which might be at risk of undermining the foundations".
November 12, 2025 at 1:02 PM
It is just horrifying. The whole field of "your church might be sinking/disintegrating/falling down in some other way" is very much Not Fun, but... I always think 'at least I am not responsible for for Salisbury Cathedral'. (My current churches are fine, previous ones not so much.)
November 12, 2025 at 1:00 PM
Purrs from Cassie and Daphne, and prayers from me.
November 12, 2025 at 8:20 AM
The Isle of Sheppey is not, in any sense at all, part of London. Or really civilisation tbh. It is, however, where my Granny was when WWII broke out. Her father was there to debrief Polish airmen who disobeyed orders, jumped into their planes as the Germans advanced, and just about made it across.
November 11, 2025 at 9:53 PM
My mum is still telling anyone who will listen the story of the time I fell asleep in my high chair, face first into a bowl of green jelly. (I am 38.)
November 11, 2025 at 8:55 PM
Always!
November 11, 2025 at 8:53 PM
And this is why we Always Read The Footnotes.
November 11, 2025 at 3:56 PM
Tbh, the FAOC is not ready for this level. But "if you're going to write a whole section about a theologian who you are claiming advances your argument, you probably want to cite his actual work at some point and not just one (1) secondary source" is something they could apparently do with grasping.
November 11, 2025 at 3:54 PM
'Citation is political' as one of our tutors at Queens used to remind us.

(Also, would anyone like to have a word with the Faith and Order Commisson about this?)
November 11, 2025 at 3:50 PM
It's such a good collection. Very much deserving of a wide audience.
November 11, 2025 at 11:30 AM
I would love to know how it was decided which theologians to engage with in this paper. Because it seems to me to be a very random selection. And some... um... 'interesting' interpretations of some of them. (Reading this if you *are* one of those theologians must be absolutely *wild*.)
cookie monster is sitting at a table with a tray of food and the words choices written on it
ALT: cookie monster is sitting at a table with a tray of food and the words choices written on it
media.tenor.com
November 10, 2025 at 6:28 PM
☝️evergreen post right here 🙄
November 10, 2025 at 6:12 PM
Without commenting on the actual theological content... There is an awful lot of "it may be said" type phrasing in this document. If I handed this in to my PhD supervisors it would be coming back with a lot of notes suggesting I need to substantiate the claims I'm making - and rightly so.
Okay Oh Yeah GIF
ALT: Okay Oh Yeah GIF
media.tenor.com
November 10, 2025 at 6:09 PM
That's being generous, I think. It reads to me like several trains of thought which have collided and (in places) derailed each other. Which I recognise is one of the risks of theology by committee. But still...
November 10, 2025 at 6:04 PM
Made it almost to the end of the executive summary before my first 'WTF??' in the margin 👍
a white rabbit with pink ears is standing on a table with its mouth open .
ALT: a white rabbit with pink ears is standing on a table with its mouth open .
media.tenor.com
November 10, 2025 at 5:20 PM
Yes, I think I'll stick with this one, which has been serving me well for years.
November 10, 2025 at 7:31 AM
Very understandable. My grandma used to literally put them on before the roast potatoes! 🤮
November 9, 2025 at 8:05 PM
20 mins??? If boolomg, 5 mins is plenty! But I agree about frying. Stir fried with a bit of bacon and/or chilli = 😋
November 9, 2025 at 7:53 PM