Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pete173:
This is the hierarchy of truth that everyone who swears canonical obedience assents to.

---

quote:

---

In the declaration you are about to make will you affirm your loyalty to this inheritance of faith as your inspiration and guidance under God in bringing the grace and truth of Christ to this generation and making him known to those in your care?

---

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'?

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by GreyFace:

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

---

Yeah, but they made us use their name! They wouldn't make Seabury a bishop if we didn't. And Americans being Americans even then, it naturally didn't occur to anyone at the time that they should have qualified the term "Episcopal" with anything other than "Protestant."

quote:

---

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.

---

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.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by jerusalem cross:
... And the fuss over Jeffrey John here was one of the worst pieces of ecclesiastical hypocrisy I've seen in ages. Especially as he was behaving according to the House of Bps own guidelines. The Bp of Oxford and Rowan should have told the objectors that it was none of their business and to b***er off. If they witheld their financial support, as threatened, then the CofE would refuse to pay for their clergy. Did the Evos of Birmingham object to a divorced and remarried (with still-living ex-spouse) Bishop when appointed, and get him removed? I think not. ...

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by GreyFace:

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.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amos:

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.

---

exactly so.

--------------------
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.

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by pete173:
I was responding to a request to explore why it is that ECUSA doesn't feel like home to me, which isn't the same thing at all. I don't want the split, but it's beginning to feel more likely. And I'm trying to keep the evangelical head-bangers on this side of the pond from leaving the CofE...

---

quote:

---

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.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:

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.

---

Well, there was an extremely high level of music geeking going on at that gathering (one cantor, two organists/choir directors, one semi-pro musician). I am grateful to tomb for explaining how "pointing" worked in a way that I could understand. At my church, the congregation is expected to sing Anglican chant (we are, I am told, unusual in this) but nobody had explained the rules to me .

There also might be more than a trace of the old "discussion" we keep having about how the English don't get "the notes" in their hymnals, and the Americans (not just Piskies) do. The service Emma refers to had a printed service sheet that "had the notes" (except for Tallis' Canon, which we sang through once in practice) and all the words.

Mind you, the service was straight out of our standard-issue 1979 BCP, which all TEC congregations use in one form or another (and layfolk often possess for their private devotions).

Re the OP, I'm gobstruck as well. Before I toodled off to Seattle, I was admiring Pete's words re: "what we say instead of inerrancy", because it's something that comes up a lot on my side of the pond.

Charlotte

--------------------
WTFWED? "Remember to always be yourself, unless you suck" - the Gator
Memory Eternal! Sheep 3, Phil the Wise Guy, and Jesus' Evil Twin in the SoF Nativity Play

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dave Marshall:

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.

---

Compared with you, darling, we're all Pope Benedict.


--------------------
Love is the only sane and satisfactory answer to the problem of human existence. - Erich Fromm

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by RuthW:
And I don't need to remind you that from a liberal perspective this is a difference of opinion over how to read certain passages of scripture, not over whether we ought to read scripture.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by jerusalemcross:
Robing is largely a matter of either preference or finances. Rarely theological or doctrinal positions.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
Most, I think, would agree that it sits upon a proverbial three legged stool supported by Scripture, Tradition, and Reason.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rossweisse:

quote:

---

Originally posted by jerusalem cross:
...Did the Evos of Birmingham object to a divorced and remarried (with still-living ex-spouse) Bishop when appointed, and get him removed? I think not. ...

---

... Jesus ... did condemn -- in rather strong language -- divorce and remarriage, I think I'd like a bit of consistency, please. Thank you.
...

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
Most, I think, would agree that it sits upon a proverbial three legged stool supported by Scripture, Tradition, and Reason.

---

Why?

Anglicanism has not traditionally seen scripture and tradition as co-equal legs. rather scripture is both foundational (as witnessing to Jesus christ) and correctional, in that it provides a limit to traditions. Thus far and no further. What is not provabel from scripture is not to be required.

Reason is a different case altogether. Reason, logic, is just another name for thinking done right. Or perhaps better thinking done reflectively. It can't be placed in opposition to scripture or tradition. Anyone studying scripture, or forming tradtion, inevitably has to be using reason. And the better they use reason the better they use scripture and tradition. Reason is not a different leg to the stool. Reason is more what the legs are made of. The stronger your reason the stronger your legs.

A more believable tripod would be scripture, tradition, and experience. A lot of people, especially in Methodist, or Holiness, or Pentecostal, or Charismatic traditions would require experience to be in there. And even then the Anglican (and other mainstram Protestant) tradition has been to give an authority to scripture over tradition and experience, because Scripture witnesses to the Incarnation and god's primary revelation to us,

But that doesn't exclude reason. We comprehend and absorb our experience by reason, by thinking and memory. Just as we read our Bibles with our reason, and listen to our teachers with our reason.

---

Ken, this is marvellous stuff, and bears repetition if for only that reason. Kudos to you!

--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amazing Grace:
There also might be more than a trace of the old "discussion" we keep having about how the English don't get "the notes" in their hymnals, and the Americans (not just Piskies) do.

---

• people who are in Christ / have faith in Christ / obey Christ / whatever get to God
• those who aren't / don't don't get to God (leaving aside some debate over what comes next)

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Custard.:
It's about as clear as it could possibly be on the importance for people of all other religions needing to become Christians. (Jews, pagans - there weren't many Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc in the Roman Empire but it's obvious they'd be in too)

[SNIP]

So when I hear KJS (for example) refusing to say that and strongly implicitly denying it, I worry about her. And when I hear bishops and ministers in the C of E denying it, I wonder which Bible they're reading or whether they're so enslaved to this culture that they miss or reject the abundantly clear teaching of the Bible.

---

Custard---it is as clear as it can be to YOU. You've been on here long enough to know that a statement like "they miss or reject the abundantly clear teaching of the Bible" is inflammatory and insulting.

Go back to the earliest Church Fathers and you can find universalists. I read the same Bible you do, and I see that Jesus IS the way to the Father---no matter what faith you might be practicing before you get to meet Him. It's abundantly clear to ME that Jesus isn't going to cast all the Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc., into Hell because they didn't convert.

So where does that leave us?

Apparently, it means that some people think I'm "so enslaved to the culture" that they can't even take Communion with me.

What does that say about their faith? That it can be tainted by the likes of me?

Amos--I take your point. I just felt a little sheepish about prooftexting to a bishop...

--------------------
Sister Jackhammer of Quiet Reflection

Posted                          

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.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

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?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Me.:
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...............

---

Dear, I think you'll find that Anglo-Catholic congregations in the UK are proficient at these skills, too.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Henry Troup:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rossweisse:

quote:

---

Originally posted by jerusalem cross:
...Did the Evos of Birmingham object to a divorced and remarried (with still-living ex-spouse) Bishop when appointed, and get him removed? I think not. ...

---

... Jesus ... did condemn -- in rather strong language -- divorce and remarriage, I think I'd like a bit of consistency, please. Thank you.
...

---

I thought that the C of E still had a pretty hard line on remarriage of divorced persons. How did that Bishop of Birmingham manage it if the heir to the throne can't?

---

I was under the belief the C of E now allows divorced people to remarry in its churches at the discretion of the vicar.

That said, my ex (who was seeing the new girl while "married" to me) later married her in his church, became a Reader a year later and is still planning to pursue ordination I believe

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by jerusalemcross:

Rather a lot of CofE churches don't have a full ... 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.

in the individual elements of the liturgy, since the advent of CW here. This can be either good or bad, depending on your POV!
down. Such as verse 1 from Ps 8 (the "pointing" is what looks like apostrophe markings):

... 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.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
If this is the best we can do, I'm tending towards the 'lazy assumption' end of the spectrum.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by me:-
I have some sympathy for +Pete's and Ken's position re Scripture being the longer leg; certainly I would read the 39 Arts as establishing the supremacy of Scripture as normative for Anglicanism.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by pete173:
That's reformed catholicism, and it's what the CofE formularies say too - It's not just an evangelical view, it's the official and legal position of the CofE.

---

I certainly don't have any difficulty being a Reformed Catholic. Indeed I see myself very much in that Tradition, which is why I find it so hard to find huge amounts of common ground with Anglo-Evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics. Having been a 'Real' Evangelical I find the Anglican version of Evangelicalism a rather mild conformist affair, and even more upper middle class than my non-conformist days. I guess I used to define as an Anglo-Catholic, but I also find the Anglican version of Catholicism a rather mild conformist affair. and just as middle class. Indeed a lot of Anglicanism and Christianity is Middle class.

I am rather fond of Laud, but really Wesley is the Anglican who excites me most, as does Percy Dearmer. All were radical but flawed figures.

But at the end of the day I am Philosophically Liberal. I like Tillich. I even enjoy Cupitt at points. I even find much to agree with in Dawkins or Dennett. I am critical of the Christian faith because it is my faith and for me such self examination is part of my faith. My closest friends are Atheists.

Does Pete think there is a place for people like me in the Church? C'mon Pete you can tell me. You have known me on the net for 5 years at least I guess.

--------------------
blog//twitter//
linkedin

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
... I'd say Scripture-Tradition-Reason in the epistemological order of things.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Yes, I think I said that a few posts ago here:

quote:

---

Originally posted by me:-
I have some sympathy for +Pete's and Ken's position re Scripture being the longer leg; certainly I would read the 39 Arts as establishing the supremacy of Scripture as normative for Anglicanism.

---

So, yes, I'd say Scripture-Tradition-Reason in the epistemological order of things.

---

I'm visualizing such a stool. I believe I'd slide off.

Paige:

quote:

---

Actually, I'm beginning to think that the stool analogy should take scripture as the seat itself, and tradition, reason, and experience as the legs...

---

Now, that's a stool I could sit on- as long as it is cushioned with love and compassion.

--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paige:
Spawn---what motto would you have us take? "The Episcopal Church Welcomes You--As Long as You Accept That You Aren't Really Christian Until You Become a ConEvo"?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Henry Troup:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
... I'd say Scripture-Tradition-Reason in the epistemological order of things.

---

But the "reason/experience" leg should never be so short as to complete foreclose the possibility of change. The other two never change. (Although our understanding of scripture changes.)

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spawn:
But my point was about the determinative nature of the value of inclusion on the doctrine and theology of the Episcopal Church, rather than the motto itself. 'The Episcopal Church Welcomes You' is a great slogan, btw.

---

Okay---pace on the slogan thing.

You know, I think we're completely Biblically based on the value of inclusion. Jesus hung out with and healed Gentiles, tax collectors, women, and criminals---shocking the sensibilities of His followers. Is it not possible that we are trying to walk in our Saviour's footsteps?

And God was pretty clear to Peter that he had to get over his clinging to The Old Ways and make room for Something New. And he didn't like it at all---but he couldn't deny that God was removing the stumbling block of the dietary laws. Is it not possible that this is what we are doing with those very small number of verses about the inferiority of women and the evils of homosexuality?

Lyda--I'm with you, my friend. If I didn't believe that Jesus was more concerned with love and compassion (which is *exactly* what I get from the Gospels), I wouldn't be bothered to be a Christian.

--------------------
Sister Jackhammer of Quiet Reflection

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
Most, I think, would agree that it sits upon a proverbial three legged stool supported by Scripture, Tradition, and Reason.

---

Why?

Anglicanism has not traditionally seen scripture and tradition as co-equal legs. rather scripture is both foundational (as witnessing to Jesus christ) and correctional, in that it provides a limit to traditions. Thus far and no further. What is not provabel from scripture is not to be required.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Not so much of a chicken and egg situation as far as post-Reformation Anglicanism is concerned: with the exception of the Apocrypha, the Canon of Scripture had been in undisputed existence for over a millenium by the time the 39 Articles were formulated giving supremacy to Scripture.

---