|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: ECUSA vs. The C of E
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Pete173 said (on the Opposition to Growing Churches thread):
quote:
But I suppose if you push me, I have no sense that ECUSA and the CofE have much in common, and I'm pessimistic that we can hold together in the Anglican Communion, because although there is diversity in both Churches, the governing assumptions about the Faith seem completely different. But that's probably something that ought to be debated (and probably has been in Dead Horses) on another thread.
So apologies for derailing this one!
So what's the deal here? We know that ECUSA have got a gay Bishop which is hardly universally popular, there's been a well publicised incident with raisin cakes and naff mother goddess liturgy.
I get the impression that ECUSA is rather more liberal than the Church of England. Probably more liberal than I am comfortable with. But - I realise this is all highly subjective - do ECUSAn's no longer subscribe to the Nicene Creed? Have Sacred Scripture been abandoned for readings from 'I'm OK, You're OK'? Is Spong representative? Is there honey still for tea? Or are a bunch of reactionary provocateurs stirring things up? I remember a while ago a thread about +Schori in which her heretical views on Christ's divinity were debated, despite the absence of any evidence that +Schori held such views. So is there a lazy C of E assumption that ECUSA is uber-liberal in the same way that there is a lazy secular assumption in some Brit. circles that the C of E doesn't really believe in God.
What's really going on? An ignorant Brit wants to know.
[ 08. May 2007, 01:45: Message edited by: Professor Kirke ]
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
the coiled spring
Shipmate
# 2872
|
Posted
Callan posted
quote:
We know that ECUSA have got a gay Bishop which is hardly universally popular, there's been a well publicised incident with raisin cakes and naff mother goddess liturgy.
How do we know the Church of England does not have a gay matey?
--------------------
give back to God what He gives so it is used for His glory not ours.
Posts: 2359 | From: mountain top retreat lodge overlooking skegness | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
We still say the Nicene Creed. Some people may cross their fingers while saying it. We still read scripture. For the most part, we have coffee and not tea. Spong represents one group within ECUSA but not the majority. For the most part, I would say your assesment of ECUSA is correct. Of course, there are conservatives who emphasize left-wing extremists as being representative of the entire church and visa versa. The conservative reaction to Jefforts-Schori, who I don't particularly like, was outrageous. At the same time, I too worry TEC is slowly drifting towards Unitarianism. This bothers me. I can't really contrast it with the C of E because I don't know anything about the Church of England apart from what I read.
[ 09. January 2007, 18:21: Message edited by: Matins ]
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
Pete173 said (on the Opposition to Growing Churches thread):
[QUOTE] I get the impression that ECUSA is rather more liberal than the Church of England. Probably more liberal than I am comfortable with. But - I realise this is all highly subjective - do ECUSAn's no longer subscribe to the Nicene Creed? Have Sacred Scripture been abandoned for readings from 'I'm OK, You're OK'? Is Spong representative? Is there honey still for tea? Or are a bunch of reactionary provocateurs stirring things up? I remember a while ago a thread about +Schori in which her heretical views on Christ's divinity were debated, despite the absence of any evidence that +Schori held such views. So is there a lazy C of E assumption that ECUSA is uber-liberal in the same way that there is a lazy secular assumption in some Brit. circles that the C of E doesn't really believe in God.
What's really going on? An ignorant Brit wants to know.
1. No. The Creeds are still ECUSA/TEC doctrine.
2. No. We read three or four selections from Scripture every time we celebrate the Eucharist (which does not consist of Pepsi and raisin cakes). Some parishes no longer read Psalms, though, which I think is a mistake. I should say that it's my impression that things are quite different depending on region, too; Rite I (the "old language" rite that imitates the 1928) is rarely to be found west of the Mississippi, from what I hear, but it's fairly commonplace (at least at early services) on the East Coast. California seems quite different to me in many ways; less Anglo-philic and more "experimental." But that's just an impression.
3. No. Although what do you mean by "representative"? Many people like Spong; I really don't see what the big deal is, although I agree with some things he says. He rarely gets asked to speak at Episcopal Churches, from what I hear; he's more popular in the UCC and elsewhere.
4. Coffee hours are still good, although cucumber sandwiches are becoming a rarity these days.
5. ECUSA/TEC is liberal, in general - but there's a wide, wide variety in levels of churchmanship and theology. To me, it appears that the younger generation of clergy is "socially liberal and theologically traditional" in a way the previous (60s?) general was not.
Don't know if that helps. Will think more about it, too....
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
I am interested in pete173's comment:
quote:
Originaly posted by pete173:
...the governing assumptions about the Faith seem completely different
Also wondering which Dead Horses he thinks this might touch upon. Homosexuality? Inerrancy (or authority) of the bible? Something else?
I think "governing assumptions about the Faith" is an interesting category for looking at any denomination. Not that I know how to do it very cleverly in words yet. But it might be a good category for me for some stuff that's puzzled me mightily and was part of why I started coming to the Ship boards.
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paige
Shipmate
# 2261
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
Or are a bunch of reactionary provocateurs stirring things up?
Ding, ding, ding! Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner!!! ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Callan---every parish I've been associated with (three and counting) has been headed by a woman and packed mostly with the sort of liberals you suggest you'd be uncomfortable with.
And yet, every Sunday, we've read the Old Testament, the Psalms, the Epistles, and the Gospel. Nary a self-help book in sight...
We also say the Nicene Creed every Sunday, and though I heretically change the third-person pronoun referring to the Holy Spirit to "She" and leave out the filoque (thanks to the Orthodoxen), I don't notice anyone skipping it or ostentatiously crossing their fingers.
We still preach that "Christ was crucified, Christ is risen, Christ will come again."
And we generally serve cookies at Coffee Hour---I've yet to see a raisin cake. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
Sister Jackhammer of Quiet Reflection
Posts: 886 | From: Sweet Tea Land, USA | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Qestia
Marshwiggle
# 717
|
Posted
Well, I attend ECUSA churches here in gay-loving Massachusetts and I can tell you we've pretty much abandoned the liturgy for free-wheeling homosexual orgies. In addition, not only do we ordain women, but we no longer ordain men, Instead of the Bible, we hear readings from Women Who run with the Wolves and sing hymns like "Jesus is a lady willow tree". What, is that different from what you folks do across the pond?
But seriously, even in my Bush-hating, swahili-hymn-loving People's Republic of Cambridge church, while we sometimes skipped reciting the creed (although not because we disagreed with it) we still followed the liturgy, read all the proscribed bits from the Bible, and used the BCP. As far as I can tell the main issue is that some sections of ECUSA are giving more weight to the Lord's dictum on removing the beam from your own eye than a few offhand lines in Paul's letters.
--------------------
I’m on Aslan’s side even if there isn’t an Aslan to lead it.
I’m going to live as like a Narnian as I can even if there isn’t any Narnia.
Posts: 1213 | From: Boston | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
HenryT
Canadian Anglican
# 3722
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Paige:
...And we generally serve cookies at Coffee Hour---I've yet to see a raisin cake.
You can have raisin cakes at coffee hour. Just not during the liturgy.
***
We've had a few threads on the Anglican Communion and what it may or may not mean be, or do. One that still exists and may be relevant is Is 'true' Anglicanism Reformed?. The one I started in October about the AC has been deleted somehow, but one from June lingers in Oblivion as Purgatory: Rowan's letter on the future of the Anglican Communion - it was started by pete173.
--------------------
"Perhaps an invincible attachment to the dearest rights of man may, in these refined, enlightened days, be deemed old-fashioned" P. Henry, 1788
Posts: 7231 | From: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
I have to say I'm surprised to read the comments of +Pete. As far as I've been able to gather from the Ship, TEC and the CofE are very close on almost every issue. TEC seems to have taken the Parish Communion movement more to heart, whilst Eucharists incorporating a wider range of catholic ritual are somewhat more common and charismatic churches and FiF-types somewhat less so.
Beyond that, the theology on anything that matters looks identical. Bishops who are female/openly gay (and note that qualifier!) have been around in TEC slightly sooner than in the CofE, no doubt due that curious American attachment to democracy which so many have commented upon. But such things are adiaphora, at best.
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Godwine
Shipmate
# 8686
|
Posted
One of the biggest differences, in my experience, is the parochial system. The lack of a parochial system in ECUSA/TEC results in a different outlook in terms of an individual church's ministry in many ways.
Posts: 62 | From: A green and pleasant land | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paige
Shipmate
# 2261
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Henry Troup:
You can have raisin cakes at coffee hour. Just not during the liturgy.
Oops...I realized that was what he meant after it was too late to edit.
Actually, that's one of our greatest corporate sins, I think. We use those vile little styrofoam wafers instead of real bread. To be honest, I'd rather have a raisin cake than those little bits of faux food...
--------------------
Sister Jackhammer of Quiet Reflection
Posts: 886 | From: Sweet Tea Land, USA | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
I should add that I'm pretty traditional theologically, myself, so that might influence my opinions on all this. I naturally gravitate towards parishes that are traditional also.
And yes, much of what you hear is based on the desperate desire for a split on the part of the so-called "orthodox" schismtatics. They do not hesitate to misrepresent ECUSA if they think it will further their ambition to create their own province - or, hopefully, to replace ECUSA/TEC entirely.
Sometimes it seems these people have never been to an ECUSA parish outside the conservative south, so it really makes them appear foolish IMO. They quite obviously have no idea what's actually going on.
The Spong thing is really old-hat here by now, I must say. He's not a bishop any longer, and he's not really a focal point anymore - except for the schismatics. They love him.
One thing I'll say, though: I think this whole dust-up has been productive in a way. It's forced us to have some serious discussions about who we are as a church, and IMO this has been a very good thing. I would also advise you to read some of the liberal/moderate USA clergy bloggers: Fr. Jake, Tobias Haller, Fr. AKMA, Fr. Knisely. All very traditional theologically, all moderate-to-liberal socially.
I personally think we have a very good thing going here. Another interesting thing I've noticed is that my parish (and I know others) is getting a lot of ex-RCCs. This is another of the things influencing the "socially-liberal-theologically-tradition" direction we're taking, IMO.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Godwine
Shipmate
# 8686
|
Posted
As far as the liberal trends in ECUSA/TEC are concerned, lack of establishment has allowed dioceses to develop their own culture or "flavour" without pressure for greater latitude.
Liberal dioceses and conservative dioceses, in light of the autonomy they are given, may become easily entrenched in their respective positions. The fact that bishops are elected by diocesan conventions must have a certain effect, as well.
Posts: 62 | From: A green and pleasant land | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Godwine:
Liberal dioceses and conservative dioceses, in light of the autonomy they are given, may become easily entrenched in their respective positions. The fact that bishops are elected by diocesan conventions must have a certain effect, as well.
That does happen here - but this is reflective of a general trend in society and is not particular to the Church. Conservatives seem to cluster together physically, and liberals likewise - but hopefully in the longer run the internet and online media will help with this by forcing us to deal with one another in a virtual way, at least.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
basso
Ship’s Crypt Keeper
# 4228
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Godwine:
Liberal dioceses and conservative dioceses, in light of the autonomy they are given, may become easily entrenched in their respective positions. The fact that bishops are elected by diocesan conventions must have a certain effect, as well.
There's the effect of the nominating process, as well. In California (i.e. the Bay Area), our nominating committee looked outside the diocese for its slate of nominees. I think that's a good thing to do. Some dioceses seem to look only inward for their bishops.
b.
Posts: 4358 | From: Bay Area, Calif | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
I'm looking forward to pete173's arrival on this thread, and hope he will say how he came to his conclusion.
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laura
General nuisance
# 10
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by the coiled spring:
Callan posted
quote:
We know that ECUSA have got a gay Bishop which is hardly universally popular, there's been a well publicised incident with raisin cakes and naff mother goddess liturgy.
How do we know the Church of England does not have a gay matey?
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
The problem isn't the gay bishop. It's the gay bishop being out of the closet. I'm sure the C of E has had an occasional gay priest or bishop.
--------------------
Love is the only sane and satisfactory answer to the problem of human existence. - Erich Fromm
Posts: 16883 | From: East Coast, USA | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laura
General nuisance
# 10
|
Posted
Did +Pete173 really say that? I find myself stung. I'm a member of a very MOTR Episcopal parish. The service we say is almost word for word the same as what I've had in C of E services. We hear the lectionary. We observe the same feasts. We worship God the Father, Son & Holy Spirit. We pray for our own needs and those of others. How can we not have anything in common? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
--------------------
Love is the only sane and satisfactory answer to the problem of human existence. - Erich Fromm
Posts: 16883 | From: East Coast, USA | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spiffy
Ship's WonderSheep
# 5267
|
Posted
My mother lost her voice over Christmas, and since we hadn't seen each other for six months, she still attempted to grill me regarding my life.
"What's going on with your church?" she croaked one afternoon over lunch.
"We're building low-income housing and a mental health drop-in center," I replied. "The meetings are sooo annoying, but it's also kinda exciting."
She shook her head, made a face, and then, bringing her hands together made a gesture as if she was breaking something in half. "Split," she whispered.
I was utterly confused. "No, we're just considering moving a service to another location 'cause a lot of our parishoners have moved out of the neighborhood."
Again with the face. "Newspaper!" she demanded of my father, who brought over a paper and she pointed to a big, splashy article regarding the Virginia secessionists.
"Oh, that!" I said. "Ma, you're the one who taught me that it isn't truly a free media if you have to pay for the newspaper!"
--------------------
Looking for a simple solution to all life's problems? We are proud to present obstinate denial. Accept no substitute. Accept nothing.
--Night Vale Radio Twitter Account
Posts: 10281 | From: Beervana | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Laura:
quote:
Originally posted by the coiled spring:
Callan posted
quote:
We know that ECUSA have got a gay Bishop which is hardly universally popular, there's been a well publicised incident with raisin cakes and naff mother goddess liturgy.
How do we know the Church of England does not have a gay matey?
The problem isn't the gay bishop. It's the gay bishop being out of the closet. I'm sure the C of E has had an occasional gay priest or bishop.
Quite.
Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Young fogey
Shipmate
# 5317
|
Posted
The loss of the parochial system in America is one difference. Episcopal churches, unlike Roman Catholic churches with territorial boundaries, are entirely 'gathered communities'.
Another, and this is to do with the liberal/conservative divide and the current row, is Episcopalians don't have a strong Evangelical minority like the English Church does.
The new arrangements in America of ex-Episcopalians under overseas Anglican bishops seem an importation of that religion, not of the old-school Prayer Book English Calvinist Evo variety but the modern kind (and I predict it may have some success, regardless of one's opinion on that, thanks to crossover with American evangelicalism in the free churches). My guess is Episcopalians with those leanings had no incentive to stay, like being in the state church was in England, so they left for the free churches/Non-conformists, many of whom had taken refuge in America from the state church's power at the time (the 1600s and 1700s) in the mother country.
--------------------
A conservative blog for peace
Posts: 961 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
<tangent> The only way I can ever pronounce ECUSA is my head is as Yakuza which makes this whole discussion seem a bit surreal ... </tangent>
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Young fogey:
The loss of the parochial system in America is one difference. Episcopal churches, unlike Roman Catholic churches with territorial boundaries, are entirely 'gathered communities'.
Why should this be? It can't be anything to do with establishment, because the RC's aren't established either.
But I do believe that many American priests have a commitment to their 'parish' in the English sense of local area. Perhaps it's a localised or an anglo-catholic thing?
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PataLeBon
Shipmate
# 5452
|
Posted
I'm a memeber of ECUSA in a conservative diocese, but in a liberal parish.
In fact, my liberal church is higher up the candle than most (if not all) of the conservative churches in this area, which makes my head spin.
We, as a church, know that IF the ECUSA has a split, we have hard choices to make. Right now, our attention is based on finding what we hold in common, not what disagree on.
Our conservative bishop wants us to have a conversation with the other churches in the area and find a way for all of us to work together.
In fact our very liberal woman priest was invited to teach at the Nigerian church in the area, and they are coming to our church to talk and teach.
Posts: 1907 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by Young fogey:
The loss of the parochial system in America is one difference. Episcopal churches, unlike Roman Catholic churches with territorial boundaries, are entirely 'gathered communities'.
Why should this be? It can't be anything to do with establishment, because the RC's aren't established either.
But I do believe that many American priests have a commitment to their 'parish' in the English sense of local area. Perhaps it's a localised or an anglo-catholic thing?
You're absolutely right that some priests have this commitment - and that probably it's more prevalent among Anglo-Catholics. But others probably don't think about it in the same way, although all Episcopal churches I'm familiar with do some sort of outreach work in their local communities.
Actually, in some states - Lousiana is one - the local political jurisidictions (elsewhere called "counties") are actually called "parishes." (I think maybe Virginia also, but am not sure.)
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Qestia:
But seriously, even in my Bush-hating, swahili-hymn-loving People's Republic of Cambridge church, while we sometimes skipped reciting the creed (although not because we disagreed with it) we still followed the liturgy, read all the proscribed bits from the Bible, and used the BCP. As far as I can tell the main issue is that some sections of ECUSA are giving more weight to the Lord's dictum on removing the beam from your own eye than a few offhand lines in Paul's letters.
Well Qestia, I think it's gone beyond a difference beyond the Old Dart (C of E) and America (ECUSA) and could tear apart the whole Anglican Communion.
I think the only apt comment comes from Father Brown (in The Resurrection of Father Brown): "You silly, silly people. May God bless you and give you greater sense." (possibly not quite verbatim)
That, I feel, is the only worthwhile comment I'll ever make on the issue.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
I am speaking here as URC member who has had contact with the Episcopalian Church of Scotland. I had a friend who doubted whether they could be a member of the C of E even though they were Episcopalian and I sometimes wonder if I would settle in the C of S even though I am Reformed with Presbyterian leanings.
What both of us experience is our faith culture as defining a significant part of who we are. By being the "national" church both the C of S and the C of E have a hegemonic culture that contains a very wide variety of Christian opinion. In both case the minority denomination is more liberal.
The question is about the pressure to maintain the hegenomic nature of the national church when a sister church is following a distinctly more liberal tradition than it can and maintain it. The C of S is not the "mother" denomination of PCUSA in the same way as the C of E is of ECUSA, this gives freedom but does Anglicanism wish to become the loose alliance* that Reformed Denominations hold? Or is it going to be more hierarchicial about belief? Can it sustain its walk on the present tight-rope and where if it doeesn't will the CofE end up?
Jengie
World Alliance of Reformed Churches(WARC) does exist and probably contains the more liberal 50% of Reformed Denominations. It has expelled members for heresy but it is up to Reformed denominations to join and I would guess around 50% choose not to, normally the more conservative.
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rossweisse
High Church Valkyrie
# 2349
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Laura:
Did +Pete173 really say that? I find myself stung. I'm a member of a very MOTR Episcopal parish. The service we say is almost word for word the same as what I've had in C of E services. We hear the lectionary. We observe the same feasts. We worship God the Father, Son & Holy Spirit. We pray for our own needs and those of others. How can we not have anything in common?
At Evensong in my parish, we DO say the same service word for word -- we use 1662.
Otherwise, Laura, you've said it all. Thank you.
Ross
--------------------
I'm not dead yet.
Posts: 15117 | From: Valhalla | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Laura:
Did +Pete173 really say that? I find myself stung. I'm a member of a very MOTR Episcopal parish. The service we say is almost word for word the same as what I've had in C of E services. We hear the lectionary. We observe the same feasts. We worship God the Father, Son & Holy Spirit. We pray for our own needs and those of others. How can we not have anything in common?
You're stung; I'm astonished. We do all these things in my liberal parish. And we get very orthodox preaching. I have no idea what "governing assumptions about the Faith" pete173 has that my parish priest and my bishop don't.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
pete173
Shipmate
# 4622
|
Posted
Sorry, have been absent watching the Scousers get stuffed by the Gooners in the battle to play the Spurs.
Interesting response, and a lively thread. Pond differences clearly impinge upon the debate.
Fascinating assumption that because we pray similar liturgies we are on common ground - which doesn't work for many of you for Methodists or RCs! Ditto the formularies.
I guess that's what's at the heart of our mutual incomprehension of each other. For evangelical Anglicans (and Hooker and Jewel), it's scripture that is definitive. Creeds and formularies are only adjuncts to that. So I'm looking for scripture to be the governing principle - and I don't need to rehearse the primary areas of disagreement that have led to the Windsor Report and the defections from ECUSA by the conservatives.
That's why I spoke about governing assumptions. It's not about looking similar, it's about what makes the institution tick. How to explain it? Well, I suppose a sermon that quotes the millennium development goals rather than scripture, and a contentless shalom kind of encapsulates it for me. Very laudable, but what's distinctively Christian about it?
If, by the way, you try to reference evangelism on the ECUSA site, what you get is "church development".
The stuff about bishops suspending clergy and bullying congregations and constant litigation is continually reported this side of the pond, and not just by the evangelical extremists.
I suppose ECUSA feels like the CofE would if the liberals ever actually won. And if they did, I'd have left.
--------------------
Pete
Posts: 1653 | From: Kilburn, London NW6 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
I must say that the OP impresses me, frankly, as a wind up. Anyone who knows anything about Northern Hemisphere/Anglo-Saxon Anglicanism knows that ECUSA and the CofE have a set of virtually identical liturgies. Indeed, I should think that the formal, prescribed liturgies are far more apt to be ignored among the Evos of the CofE than in TEC. Further, in TEC I haven't experienced any generalised liturgical differences between theologically and socially conservative parishes and liberal ones (if we must use these dreaded terms).
Overall, ECUSA's really a pretty normal, boring place most of the time.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Emma Louise
Storm in a teapot
# 3571
|
Posted
Rather a lot of uk C of E churches follow an (often evening) service of 30-mins modern choruses, prayers and notices 20 min preach and then a song/prayer at the end. Not that indistinguishable from a vineyard service really.
Many c of E churches arent robed up in the same way, many dont have robed choirs.
I dont think these really matter all that much in terms of Christianity - but from the ECUSA peeps I met (at a wonderful colorado meet) I dont think we could recognise each others traditions hardly at all! they were talking about pointing (singing from dots?) and arrangements of various sung bits (caticles?) and they could all follow a sung service that us 3 brits (and flausa maybe) couldnt follow at all...
Posts: 12719 | From: Enid Blyton territory. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Scrumpmeister
Ship’s Taverner
# 5638
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Qestia:
...read all the proscribed bits from the Bible...
Why has ECUSA proscribed certain bits of the Bible?
--------------------
If Christ is not fully human, humankind is not fully saved. - St John of Saint-Denis
Posts: 14741 | From: Greater Manchester, UK | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
I guess that's what's at the heart of our mutual incomprehension of each other. For evangelical Anglicans (and Hooker and Jewel), it's scripture that is definitive. Creeds and formularies are only adjuncts to that. So I'm looking for scripture to be the governing principle - and I don't need to rehearse the primary areas of disagreement that have led to the Windsor Report and the defections from ECUSA by the conservatives.
That's why I spoke about governing assumptions. It's not about looking similar, it's about what makes the institution tick. How to explain it? Well, I suppose a sermon that quotes the millennium development goals rather than scripture, and a contentless shalom kind of encapsulates it for me. Very laudable, but what's distinctively Christian about it?
If, by the way, you try to reference evangelism on the ECUSA site, what you get is "church development".
Well, we're not evangelicals and don't claim to be - at least, not in the sense you mean. Why would you want to force us to be - and how is that related to discussion?
If the PB were all there were to the Episcopal Church, perhaps the thing about "Shalom" would be a reasonable point. As it is, she's not, and I don't think it is.
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
The stuff about bishops suspending clergy and bullying congregations and constant litigation is continually reported this side of the pond, and not just by the evangelical extremists.
Too bad it's not true.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Saint Bertelin:
quote:
Originally posted by Qestia:
...read all the proscribed bits from the Bible...
Why has ECUSA proscribed certain bits of the Bible?
I assume she meant 'prescribed', Smarty-boots.
Meanwhile, I am hoping to do some reflecting on my years as a member of various ECUSA parishes in the US as opposed to the time I've spent in ordained ministry in the Church of England and post a reasoned reply to pete173 tomorrow.
What I am sorry to read in his post is an assertion that lex orandi is not, as far as he is concerned, lex credendi.
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Emma.:
Rather a lot of uk C of E churches follow an (often evening) service of 30-mins modern choruses, prayers and notices 20 min preach and then a song/prayer at the end. Not that indistinguishable from a vineyard service really.
Many c of E churches arent robed up in the same way, many dont have robed choirs.
I dont think these really matter all that much in terms of Christianity - but from the ECUSA peeps I met (at a wonderful colorado meet) I dont think we could recognise each others traditions hardly at all! they were talking about pointing (singing from dots?) and arrangements of various sung bits (caticles?) and they could all follow a sung service that us 3 brits (and flausa maybe) couldnt follow at all...
Dear, I think you'll find that Anglo-Catholic congregations in the UK are proficient at these skills, too.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
(And I thought Evangelicals were a minority in the CofE, anyway? So why do you now seem to be claiming majority status and speaking for the Church of England and pitting it against ECUSA?
Also, I have to wonder what's so "distinctively Christian" about focusing on Scripture? Jews do this, and so do Muslims. I'd saying working to feed hungry people and trying to do something about desperate poverty is certainly as "distinctively Christian." Doing so is described as "true religion" in the book of James, in fact, correct?)
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Metapelagius
Shipmate
# 9453
|
Posted
The point made by Jengie Jon is borne out by the experience of the English Presbyterians and Scottish Episcopalians who were invited to be observers in the talks between the established churches of England and Scotland which were held in the late 1950's. They apparently found that they had far more than they expected in common with one another, compared to what each shared with the larger co-denominational body.
--------------------
Rec a archaw e nim naccer.
y rof a duv. dagnouet.
Am bo forth. y porth riet.
Crist ny buv e trist yth orsset.
Posts: 1032 | From: Hereabouts | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
RE: Pete173. It seems ridiculous to have to point out that Anglicanism is not a sola scriptura expression of Christianity. Most, I think, would agree that it sits upon a proverbial three legged stool supported by Scripture, Tradition, and Reason.
ISTM that this is really an Evo-Con vs. Anglican Mainstream challenge, rather than the specious CofE vs. ECUSA that the OP claims.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
For evangelical Anglicans (and Hooker and Jewel), it's scripture that is definitive. Creeds and formularies are only adjuncts to that. So I'm looking for scripture to be the governing principle - and I don't need to rehearse the primary areas of disagreement that have led to the Windsor Report and the defections from ECUSA by the conservatives.
I don't understand this.
You and the Jehovah's Witnesses agree that scripture is definitive and the governing principle. Do you think we have a closer affinity to them than a church that believes the Nicene Creed, uses the same liturgy and is in communion with us?
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
moveable_type
Shipmate
# 9673
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rossweisse:
At Evensong in my parish, we DO say the same service word for word -- we use 1662.
Really? 'O Lord, save the Queen/And make thy chosen people joyful'?
Posts: 1062 | From: Toronto | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by moveable_type:
quote:
Originally posted by Rossweisse:
At Evensong in my parish, we DO say the same service word for word -- we use 1662.
Really? 'O Lord, save the Queen/And make thy chosen people joyful'?
Oh, please. As if you didn't know the answer to that. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paige
Shipmate
# 2261
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
I guess that's what's at the heart of our mutual incomprehension of each other. For evangelical Anglicans (and Hooker and Jewel), it's scripture that is definitive. Creeds and formularies are only adjuncts to that. So I'm looking for scripture to be the governing principle...
[SNIP]
Well, I suppose a sermon that quotes the millennium development goals rather than scripture, and a contentless shalom kind of encapsulates it for me. Very laudable, but what's distinctively Christian about it?
I can't believe that Pete is going to make me prooftext...
Matthew 25:34-40
To have someone bang on about scripture being definitive and then slag off on the PB for asking us to support the MDGs is just....mind-boggling. If the MDGs don't have anything to do with being Christian, then I just need to sleep in on Sunday mornings. ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
Pete--I was taught in my confirmation class that we value tradition and reason as well as scripture. We all laugh about the "3-legged stool," but the image works for me---if one leg of the stool is overemphasized (i.e., it's too long), the stool is unstable. You need to hold all things in balance. I've been in a church where scripture (not God) was worshipped, tradition was derided (unless, of course, it was *our* tradition), and reason pooh-poohed. I'm not interested, thanks very much.
And folks---a minor, but important point. ECUSA doesn't exist anymore. It is TEC (The Episcopal Church), because not all of our provinces are in the United States.
--------------------
Sister Jackhammer of Quiet Reflection
Posts: 886 | From: Sweet Tea Land, USA | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Paige:
It is TEC (The Episcopal Church), because not all of our provinces are in the United States.
And that's another story. If I was a member of the Scottish Episcopal Church, I'd be a bit annoyed at you for that, particularly since they were there first
I think we should rename the Church of England - after all, we have dioceses outside England. The Catholic Church has a nice ring to it.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
pete173
Shipmate
# 4622
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
For evangelical Anglicans (and Hooker and Jewel), it's scripture that is definitive. Creeds and formularies are only adjuncts to that. So I'm looking for scripture to be the governing principle - and I don't need to rehearse the primary areas of disagreement that have led to the Windsor Report and the defections from ECUSA by the conservatives.
I don't understand this.
You and the Jehovah's Witnesses agree that scripture is definitive and the governing principle. Do you think we have a closer affinity to them than a church that believes the Nicene Creed, uses the same liturgy and is in communion with us?
You misread Hooker. He is quite clear that the so-called tripod has one leg longer than the others: “What Scripture doth plainly deliver, to that first place both of credit and obedience is due; the next whereunto is whatsoever any man can necessarily conclude by force of reason; after these the voice of the Church succeedeth. That which the Church by her ecclesiastical authority shall probably think and define to be true or good, must in congruity of reason over-rule all other inferior judgments whatsoever”
That's reformed catholicism, and it's what the CofE formularies say too - Articles 6 - 9, and Canons A2 - A5 (note the qualification "foreasmuch as" [the BCP and the Creeds] are "not repugnant to the word of God"/"agreeable to the said scriptures.")
This is the hierarchy of truth that everyone who swears canonical obedience assents to. It's not just an evangelical view, it's the official and legal position of the CofE.
--------------------
Pete
Posts: 1653 | From: Kilburn, London NW6 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
jerusalemcross
Shipmate
# 12179
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Emma.:
Rather a lot of uk C of E churches follow an (often evening) service of 30-mins modern choruses, prayers and notices 20 min preach and then a song/prayer at the end. Not that indistinguishable from a vineyard service really.
Many c of E churches arent robed up in the same way, many dont have robed choirs.
I dont think these really matter all that much in terms of Christianity - but from the ECUSA peeps I met (at a wonderful colorado meet) I dont think we could recognise each others traditions hardly at all! they were talking about pointing (singing from dots?) and arrangements of various sung bits (caticles?) and they could all follow a sung service that us 3 brits (and flausa maybe) couldnt follow at all...
Rather a lot of CofE churches don't have a full time priest and have to share her/him with 3 or 4 or 5 other parishes unless the parish is lucky enough to attract a part time or retired priest. Hence there can only be a Eucharistic celebration whenever the priest is on duty at that parish, maybe once a month. Regular Communion from the reserved sacrament is discouraged, even though a lay person can lead that sort of service. So it's no wonder that there are what Emma thinks as "rather a lot" of CofE churches having "hymn sandwich" services (which are perfectly OK and can be uplifting, but not as your major diet of regular worship IMHO.)I suspect, Emma, that you're in either a rural parish or not near a big city. Or your area is predominantly Evangelical parishes which might well have Communion only once a month. Just guessing.
Robing is largely a matter of either preference or finances. Rarely theological or doctrinal positions.
Whenever I visit ECUSA churches the worship I attend is just about identical in structure with what I'm used to in my parish church in the UK; and relatively minor differences in the language. Albeit with far less choice in ECUSA in the individual elements of the liturgy, since the advent of CW here. This can be either good or bad, depending on your POV! ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
As for "pointing" that's one way of indicating in print how one sings Psalms or canticles in Anglican plainchant - when the voice goes up or down. Such as verse 1 from Ps 8 (the "pointing" is what looks like apostrophe markings):
1. O Lord our Governor, how excellent is thy Name in ` all the ` world: thou hast set thy ` glory a`bove the ` heavens!
Without pointing, plainchant sung Psalms would either be in a monotone (bo-ring!) or everyone deciding to do their own thing (chaos) unless you're in a community which has done everything the same way forever and everyone knows it off by heart.
"Canticles" are Scripturally based liturgical compositions which aren't the Psalms, such as the Magnificat or Nunc Dimittis and the Song of Miriam and others. They can be said or sung. And as for following a sung service, if Emma has problems following it then I'm really quite sorry that it appears she hasn't experienced the beauty and glory of Anglican liturgy enough to be familiar with it.
[ 09. January 2007, 22:19: Message edited by: jerusalemcross ]
--------------------
What's the difference between an organist and a terrorist? You can negotiate with a terrorist.
Posts: 305 | From: somewhere west of Eden | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paige
Shipmate
# 2261
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by jerusalemcross:
Whenever I visit ECUSA churches the worship I attend is just about identical in structure with what I'm used to in my parish church in the UK; and relatively minor differences in the language.
That has been my experience in the opposite direction, jerusalemcross. My mother lives in the Diocese of Reading and I have attended services at her parish church. I didn't have any trouble following the service at all.
--------------------
Sister Jackhammer of Quiet Reflection
Posts: 886 | From: Sweet Tea Land, USA | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave Marshall
Shipmate
# 7533
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pete173:
I suppose ECUSA feels like the CofE would if the liberals ever actually won. And if they did, I'd have left.
What exactly what you mean by liberal? I've not noticed anyone on this thread from the US sounding liberal, only orthodox.
Posts: 4763 | From: Derbyshire Dales | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Godwine
Shipmate
# 8686
|
Posted
quote:
Anglican plainchant
It's either Anglican chant (harmonised), or plainchant (not).
Sunday Evensong in my parish is from Briggs and Frere, not Anglican chant.
Posts: 62 | From: A green and pleasant land | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Holding
Coffee and Cognac
# 158
|
Posted
What Pete has written on this thread seems to me to reflect either ignorance about what is happening in North America (and in some parts of the UK for that matter, including his own CofE) or prejudice -- of the type that says "The CofE as I know it -- Evangelical -- is the only valid way to be an Anglican and the rest of you are wishy-washy Liberals (ugh) who don't really deserve the name of christian."
Because I'm one of those wishy-washy Liberals who would, frankly run a mile over hot coals to avoid the kind of CofE evangelical he seems to support (and I number a couple of them among my friends so I know a little about what he's on about), I'm going to say that I regret his apparent desire to exclude me from the church in which I was born and in which I have lived and worshipped the Living God for 60 years. Even though I'd be willing to bet that my beliefs (except for his sola scriptura approach) are at least as orthodoxly Anglican as his. I regret as well his evidence inability to understand that a few loonies (for example, those who signed that Covenant the other week) don't necessarily reflect the whole of a church which numbers several millions.
John
[ 09. January 2007, 22:38: Message edited by: John Holding ]
Posts: 5929 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
