|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: ECUSA vs. The C of E
|
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
Fie, top of page and missed the edit window. My question is in response to Matt Black's:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
No, I'm not saying that the 39 Articles have authority over Scripture just that, for Anglicanism, they establish the supremacy of Scripture IMO. And whilst I'm not sure whether or not the topic of the DCs are officially a Dead Horse, it has certainly been discussed here.
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
'Deutero-canonical books" I think?
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
Yep; another name for the Apocrypha
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Paige:
You know, I think we're completely Biblically based on the value of inclusion.
You've read, I presume, Rowan Williams on this:
quote:
I don't believe inclusion is a value in itself. Welcome is. We don't say 'Come in and we ask no questions'. I do believe conversion means conversion of habits, behaviours, ideas, emotions.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Laura:
But in any case, since the C of E allows remarriage after divorce, in opposition to Christ's clear teaching on the subject
No it isn't. Why do you keep on saying that?
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
It is only from the US that I hear the repeated references to the Baptismal covenant.
What's "the Baptismal covenant" in this context?. the phrase makes me think of Presbyterians. But that is unlikely to be what you mean.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laura
General nuisance
# 10
|
Posted
ken -- I'm just frustrated. It is just extremely galling to be lectured on not valuing scripture in the case of homosexuality when we do value scripture very much, by people who live in houses of glass. Perhaps that's why I keep raising it in this context. Because it's hypocrisy.
I agree you can argue about whether it means we can allow remarriage (I think we should, for the reason that the Orthodox do). But Jesus' words were pretty clear. It's really more a point in favor of a broader view of scripture, but that is, of course, a dead horse. I'll ride it away. And I do raise it too much, I'm sorry. It's like a tic.
[ 10. January 2007, 15:57: Message edited by: Laura ]
--------------------
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
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
It is only from the US that I hear the repeated references to the Baptismal covenant.
What's "the Baptismal covenant" in this context?. the phrase makes me think of Presbyterians. But that is unlikely to be what you mean.
The BCP
Baptismal Covenant. Scroll down to "Baptismal Covenant". It's basically the Apostle's creed in Q&A format and a series of questions which were supposed to replace the one-liner in the 1662 BCP with five questions that supposedly set forth the Christian's obligations under scripture. I'm not sure why they'd be controversial.
--------------------
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
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
Here. From the 1979 BCP of the DaFMSotPECUSA. It continues on the next page.
[cross-posted]
[ 10. January 2007, 15:58: Message edited by: Autenrieth Road ]
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paige
Shipmate
# 2261
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
You've read, I presume, Rowan Williams on this:
quote:
I don't believe inclusion is a value in itself. Welcome is. We don't say 'Come in and we ask no questions'. I do believe conversion means conversion of habits, behaviours, ideas, emotions.
Custard--why on EARTH do you assume that we don't preach conversion?!
(And I've read enough Rowan to know that he extends the welcome mat to those who are critical of TEC, but not to those of us who support it. Mighty selective, that.)
I've never been in an Episcopal Church that said "Sin all you want---Jesus will love you anyway!" (Even though we do preach that Jesus loves you, regardless--since that is what scripture tells us.)
We call all to conversion and amendment of life---and if you don't feel that trying to love God and your neighbor requires a lifelong commitment to conversion, then you are far closer to sainthood than I.
I'm beginning to think that Qestia had the right attitude about this conversation from the get-go. Clearly, many of you think that Episcopalians are conducting orgies on the altar, persecuting conservatives by force-feeding them raisin cakes during the Eucharist, and engaging in scrapbooking parties where we cut out the bits of the Bible we don't like.
![[brick wall]](graemlins/brick_wall.gif) ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif) ![[Waterworks]](graemlins/bawling.gif)
--------------------
Sister Jackhammer of Quiet Reflection
Posts: 886 | From: Sweet Tea Land, USA | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
the coiled spring
Shipmate
# 2872
|
Posted
Custard posted
quote:
Posted 10 January, 2007 15:36
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
You've read, I presume, Rowan Williams on this:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't believe inclusion is a value in itself. Welcome is. We don't say 'Come in and we ask no questions'. I do believe conversion means conversion of habits, behaviours, ideas, emotions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
andreas1984 mentions in another thread about wanting to be called Christian but not being prepared to make sacrifice. Would be interested to understand what sacrifices are being made in following Christ and being more like Him on both sides in the fight for control.
A lot is made about saying the words in the right order, danger being they can become meaningless as they are spoken parrot fashion. "This is what we do and makes us Anglicians."
Satan himself can say the Nicerne Creed with the best and will believe it more then a lot of those in churches because he knows it to be true. Do we.
--------------------
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
|
|
the coiled spring
Shipmate
# 2872
|
Posted
Paige posted
quote:
've never been in an Episcopal Church that said "Sin all you want---Jesus will love you anyway!" (Even though we do preach that Jesus loves you, regardless--since that is what scripture tells us.)
Sad to say I have on this side of the great divide by clergy.
--------------------
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
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Laura:
It's basically the Apostle's creed in Q&A format and a series of questions which were supposed to replace the one-liner in the 1662 BCP with five questions that supposedly set forth the Christian's obligations under scripture. I'm not sure why they'd be controversial.
I have to say that I'm baffled - unless perhaps it is felt that it ought properly wait until such a time as the person is Confirmed?
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
It is only from the US that I hear the repeated references to the Baptismal covenant. Many people have remarked on TEC's emphasis on the ministry of all the baptised. In many ways this is a thoroughly good thing, but in my opinion the emphasis on the Baptismal covenant (with its relatively novel promises) tends to draw the focus away from personal discipleship, and transformation. It's enough to be baptised and say the baptismal covenant to have access to all the ministries of the Church.
I have no idea what basis you have for the notion that the baptismal covenant draws focus away from personal discipleship and transformation; it seems absurd to me, and it's certainly not what we are taught in my parish about what the baptismal covenant means. We renew our baptismal covenant at the Easter Vigil every year and every time we have baptisms, and each time we are reminded of its high demands. I don't see how someone could answer "I will, with God's help" to the following questions without realizing how much his or her life is going to change through the effort to keep these promises:
quote:
Will you continue in the apostles' teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in the prayers?
Will you persevere in resisting evil, and, whenever you fall into sin, repent and return to the Lord.
Will you proclaim by word and example the Good News of God in Christ?
Will you seek and serve Christ in all persons, loving your neighbor as yourself?
Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?
All I can think, Spawn, is that you are not aware that when we speak of the baptismal covenant in the Episcopal Church, we aren't talking in general about being baptized but are instead talking specifically about the declaration of belief in the Apostles' Creed and the five promises we make.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by the coiled spring:
Would be interested to understand what sacrifices are being made in following Christ and being more like Him on both sides in the fight for control.
Sometimes just putting up with each other entails sacrifice. Compromising on the issue of homosexuality for me entails sacrificing some of my personal feeling about what we really ought to be doing and defending not having a formal rite for same-sex relationships on grounds of unity to gay people who are new to the Episcopal Church when I teach our newcomers class. When pete173 writes off our entire province because he's so deeply prejudiced against liberals in the church, I wonder why I bother. I disagree with Spawn, but I respect his position, at it is grounded in real observation of the Episcopal Church (and I agree with Laura's agreement with him).
quote:
A lot is made about saying the words in the right order, danger being they can become meaningless as they are spoken parrot fashion. "This is what we do and makes us Anglicians."
Satan himself can say the Nicerne Creed with the best and will believe it more then a lot of those in churches because he knows it to be true. Do we.
This is so insulting it's not even worth responding to.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Paige:
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
You've read, I presume, Rowan Williams on this:
quote:
I don't believe inclusion is a value in itself. Welcome is. We don't say 'Come in and we ask no questions'. I do believe conversion means conversion of habits, behaviours, ideas, emotions.
Custard--why on EARTH do you assume that we don't preach conversion?!
I try not to assume anything. I was simply quoting ++Rowan for the other bits.
*takes deep breath and speaks calmly*
What we often hear is that TEC seem to say that it's important to include people, regardless of their lifestyle choices, and citing Jesus as an example. Sometimes they then seem to say that because it's important to include people regardless of their lifestyle choices, those lifestyle choices are somehow neutral.
That might not be what you're wanting to communicate, but it's certainly what we hear.
What Rowan is pointing out is that Jesus welcomed sinners, but expected repentance (as with Matthew, Zacchaeus, woman in John 8, etc).
All too often, evangelicals haven't been good enough at welcoming people, largely because we've been so busy communicating repentance that people didn't hear the welcome.
Rowan seemed to be rebuking both groups.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Qestia
Marshwiggle
# 717
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Paige:
I'm beginning to think that Qestia had the right attitude about this conversation from the get-go.
aw, shucks!
I was just trying to respond in the same tone as the OP:
quote:
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?
Unfortunately it turns out that people out there don't think these assertions are ridiculous, but factual. No wonder we have problems.
--------------------
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
|
|
Paige
Shipmate
# 2261
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Sometimes just putting up with each other entails sacrifice.
You just said a mouthful, sister.
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
When pete173 writes off our entire province because he's so deeply prejudiced against liberals in the church, I wonder why I bother.
You know, for months I have tried and tried to avoid joining Spawn's group of Episcopalians who don't give a flying fuck about the Anglican Communion, but I'm losing the battle, I'm afraid.
I feel as if I've been sentenced to eternity with a roomful of Ronald Reagan clones who keep repeating "Don't bother me with the facts!", because they cannot be arsed to learn how TEC does things. (And +Cantaur is the worst among them...)
Qestia--I cannot understand how people can read here for years, interact on a daily basis with people who are living refutations of the lies about what's going on in TEC, and still buy that tripe. It's enough to make me lose the will to live...
--------------------
Sister Jackhammer of Quiet Reflection
Posts: 886 | From: Sweet Tea Land, USA | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amazing Grace
High Church Protestant
# 95
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
I have to be away from my computer until this evening. This is not the reasoned reply I promised.
If this is not, I await what you consider (more) reasoned with great interest. ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif) quote:
I do have some sympathy for pete173's predicament (and Paige, I shouldn't worry about speaking to him as if he were a normal human being: that's why he comes on here, and it's one of his virtues
Indeed! When I was offline last weekend in Seattle, I was telling my hostess (who checked out the Ship after I told her why I was coming up) about him. quote:
---all the rest of the time people are politely abasing themselves, and it's bad for the character) as an open Evangelical bishop in the CofE, concerned to keep the more extreme evangelical sheep in the fold. I do get the impression that his views of TEC are not based on experience of it, or at the most, from an extraordinarily limited experience: lunch in the EDS cafeteria, perhaps.
What's EDS, sorry? But I have the same impression.
For what it's worth, I think there are a number of well-meaning but mush-minded chucklefucks in the works at 815 (TEC headquarters) but instead of spinning my wheels about them, I've chosen to get on with the business of living as I believe Christ has called me to do.
I'd say that TEC (esp. in major metro areas) is pretty congregational, so the community at St. Spike's is definitely part of the mix for me; TPTB are definitely on the more-orthodox end of the spectrum, which suits me down to my ex-con-evo toes. quote:
I wish we had a different Bishop Pete on here to offer a different viewpoint: +Peter of Worcester, who went to EDS (or ETS as it probably then was) and did his formative placement at (IIRC) San Quentin Prison. Theologically, he's certainly as orthodox as the bishop of Willesden, politically he may be a bit more liberal. Liberal enough that the loony end of the evangelical movement still frightens their children with his name. And yet I'm sure +Peter and +pete pray together, receive the sacraments from one another and consider themselves to be brother bishops in the CofE.
He did placement at Q? Definitely mad props to him from the other side of the Bay.
Has he published anything? I'm always interested in hearing from theologically more-conservative but socially-progressive Anglican leaders ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) .
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
Posts: 6593 | From: Sittin' by the dock of the [SF] bay | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amazing Grace:
quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
I do get the impression that his views of TEC are not based on experience of it, or at the most, from an extraordinarily limited experience: lunch in the EDS cafeteria, perhaps.
What's EDS, sorry? But I have the same impression.
I would assume Episcopal Divinity School, in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
[preview post is my friend.]
[ 10. January 2007, 17:23: Message edited by: Autenrieth Road ]
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave Marshall
Shipmate
# 7533
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard:
What we often hear is that TEC seem to say that it's important to include people, regardless of their lifestyle choices, and citing Jesus as an example. Sometimes they then seem to say that because it's important to include people regardless of their lifestyle choices, those lifestyle choices are somehow neutral.
Lifestyle choices are neutral. It's what they express in the people involved, their values, the essence of who they are and why they make those choices, that might have eternal significance.
Quoting Rowan Williams out of context does not help your credibility. My understanding is that his complaint against TEC is that they have been unwilling to explore all possible options before taking steps they knew other members of the communion were, for diverse reasons, unable to agree to.
Your readiness to make judgements, not just about individual 'lifestyles' but about a church that at least in part seems to be trying not to judge beyond its competence, is breathtaking.
You do thinking evangelicals a great disservice by identifying as one of them while posting this fundamentalist crap.
Posts: 4763 | From: Derbyshire Dales | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amazing Grace
High Church Protestant
# 95
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
quote:
Originally posted by Amazing Grace:
quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
I do get the impression that his views of TEC are not based on experience of it, or at the most, from an extraordinarily limited experience: lunch in the EDS cafeteria, perhaps.
What's EDS, sorry? But I have the same impression.
I would assume Episcopal Divinity School, in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Thanks. Out where I live, people don't talk too much about Other Seminaries ![[Biased]](wink.gif) .
(That was a helluva commute for placement if the Q story is true.)
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
Posts: 6593 | From: Sittin' by the dock of the [SF] bay | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
LA Dave
Shipmate
# 1397
|
Posted
Wow, what a thread. A bishop and the son of Cantaur emeritus. And all the rest of the usual suspects.
Just wanted to note that the Episcoblogs run by progressives/reappraisers/liberals here are much up in arms about the Panel of Reference's ruling in the case of the woman priest barring Diocese of Fort Worth, the Covenant Design group, etc. and are increasingly questioning why TEC continues to dump, annually, three quarter million dollars as its Communion dues.
While I would agree that most ECUSANs ("TECs" sounds like refugees from the IT department) could give a rodent's behind about the Anglican Communion, the amount of irritation with Rowan and the AC among at least the elites appears to be growing. (And not only in the good ole USA, apparently, as a diatribe by the "Mad Priest" would indicate, as he lambastes Rowan as the grand "Tufti" and blames Tony Blair for another "cockup" in appointing him.)
I wonder if Lambeth 2008 will be held minus most of its North American contingent?
Posts: 981 | From: Take a guess | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Paige:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
When pete173 writes off our entire province because he's so deeply prejudiced against liberals in the church, I wonder why I bother.
You know, for months I have tried and tried to avoid joining Spawn's group of Episcopalians who don't give a flying fuck about the Anglican Communion, but I'm losing the battle, I'm afraid.
I know that if it eventually comes down to a choice between being in communion with the lesbian and gay people in the pew with me in my parish or being in communion with Rowan Williams or Pete Broadbent or anyone else eight time zones away from me, I'm going to go with the folks in my parish. Some might call this a congregationalist attitude, and if so, so be it; I call it loving my neighbor. I trust our parish priest, and I trust our diocesan bishop, but I don't know people beyond that, and honestly, my loyalties don't go further than the diocese of Los Angeles.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paige
Shipmate
# 2261
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
What we often hear is that TEC seem to say that it's important to include people, regardless of their lifestyle choices, and citing Jesus as an example. Sometimes they then seem to say that because it's important to include people regardless of their lifestyle choices, those lifestyle choices are somehow neutral.
That might not be what you're wanting to communicate, but it's certainly what we hear.
And I'm telling you that you hear what you want to hear---well, that and what the schismatics bleat endlessly on about.
We have read the same Bible you do, and we have come to a different conclusion about the issue of homosexuality.
Not about fidelity and commitment and monogamy---those "lifestyle choices" you mention---just about whether those things can be found in homosexual relationships. And they clearly can.
And we also apparently have a different conception of evangelism than you do---I don't believe that people come in the door because they are aching to be told how sinful they are. People already know they are broken! They come to God in the hopes of being healed and loved, in spite of their imperfections. And this is the Good News we offer them.
We call on ALL people to repent---of their pettiness, anger, selfishness, self-righteousness, gossiping, hatred, gluttony, prejudices, sloth, lust, etc., etc., etc. We don't point our finger at one group (gays and lesbians) and say "REPENT! or you can't come in here."
(I clearly am going to have plenty to repent today, because this subject gets me so angry...)
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
All too often, evangelicals haven't been good enough at welcoming people, largely because we've been so busy communicating repentance that people didn't hear the welcome.
From where I sit, you've been so busy pointing your fingers at other people's "sins" that you haven't been attending to your own.
LA Dave---count me with those who have given up on ++Rowan. His chastising *us* for a failure to listen to others in the AC is the rankest hypocrisy.
Dave Marshall--Just a comment on your assesment of ++Rowan's issue with us: TEC has been debating the homosexuality and women's ordination issues for decades. The fact that no one else in the AC could be bothered to notice until they didn't like the outcome is not TEC's fault. Everything we do, we do in public.
Ruth--once again, I agree with everything you said.
--------------------
Sister Jackhammer of Quiet Reflection
Posts: 886 | From: Sweet Tea Land, USA | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
the coiled spring
Shipmate
# 2872
|
Posted
I find it strange all this liberal stuff, was Jesus liberal? I do believe he was not an Anglican.
It looks like young Matey Pete of Willesden seems to have upset a few brothers and sister. Have heard him described by some clergy in the Willesden area as the most liberal bishop they have meet.
To be honest I have not much trust in him but feel just because he has a number of New Wine leaders seated in churches in his area can give wrong impression. On one occasion have seen him swing the burning handbag round the altar which such joy, it was difficult to see what was happening because of the smoke and he has admitted to liking chants. Also to best of my knowledge he has put at least one gay priest into a vicarage in the area. So it does appear he does appreciate both sides of the equation.
8 time zones can make a difference in one perspective.
[ 10. January 2007, 19:21: Message edited by: the coiled spring ]
--------------------
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
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Paige:
LA Dave---count me with those who have given up on ++Rowan.
Me three. I didn't have high hopes for Frank Griswold, and I did for Rowan Williams. And I ended up being far more impressed with Griswold's performance. Not to mention his backbone.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Paige:
LA Dave---count me with those who have given up on ++Rowan.
Me three. I didn't have high hopes for Frank Griswold, and I did for Rowan Williams. And I ended up being far more impressed with Griswold's performance. Not to mention his backbone.
I so agree with that! ++Rowan has been a bitter disappointment (somewhat like an ecclesiastical Jimmy Carter, IMO). I do try to sympathise with his position, presumably trying to find a way of keeping the AC together and riding out the current cultural crisis. However, I don't think he was the right man for the job. Frankly, I'd prefer, I think, even to have a conservative who spoke unambiguously and drew a line in the sand (I'd prefer to have a liberal who drew a line in the sand, this side of Nigeria).
My real point, however, is to underscore the suspicion that a lot of the consternation here does indeed have to do with fundamental transatlantic differences in how we do things, especially in the way institutions operate. I find the English at least (if not the British generally) to be in many ways a deeply conservative and reticent society, notwithstanding their outward displays of societal progress. However, the real ethos over here seems to be to keep your head down, acquiesce to the dominant ideology of the moment whilst continuing to do what you normally do. This coping style can be called "passive aggressive", among other possible labels. "Hypocrtical" is another possible assessment for what may come of this style of dealing with things. Perhaps "conflict-avoidant" would be more neutral and accurate. OTOH, Americans tend to be a lot more transparent, unambiguous (oh yes, another Briticism: "ambiguous", esp. for sexuality), and willing to call it as they see it.
Sorry if this sounds culturally chauvinistic. I live in England by choice and there's plenty I dislike about America. However, I do think I can see some of the cultural underpinnings that cause the English Church to operate different to TEC/ECUSA.
Of course, then there are the homo-haters on both sides of the pond--a surprising number of whom seem to be Anglicans.
A final point: as a truly big tent State Church, of course the CofE is going to have a wider range of opinion and practice than would generally be found in the unestablished TEC. I don't think that means that much of this opinion and practice at the ends of the bell curve is necessarily Anglican mainstream; the contrary rather.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
Lets get this straight.
Do you ECUSA / TEC folks think that Jesus is the only way to God / salvation or not?
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
the coiled spring
Shipmate
# 2872
|
Posted
Or more bluntly do the C of E and Ecusa believe that Christ will judge us all! because there seems to be little teaching on Christ the Judge.
--------------------
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
|
|
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313
|
Posted
Is there common ground on what salvation is? Is it about living the eschata right now or is it about going to heaven after death / when The End (tm) comes?
--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.
Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Comper's Child
Shipmate
# 10580
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
Lets get this straight.
Do you ECUSA / TEC folks think that Jesus is the only way to God / salvation or not?
Is it really exactly that simple? I'd pose the question this way:
Is Jesus Christ the Way the Truth and the Light?
No doubt about it! I believe he is indeed and that no one comes to the Father except by him. But -how - that is isn't a simple equation in my mind. It's a mystery.
Too loosey goosey for you?
Posts: 2509 | From: Penn's Greene Countrie Towne | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
pete173
Shipmate
# 4622
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chapelhead:
Do us CofE folk think that Jesus is the only way to God / salvation?
Well, this one is happy to acquiesce in Article 18 "Of obtaining eternal Salvation only by the Name of Christ:
They also are to be had accursed that presume to say, That every man shall be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth, so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that Law, and the light of Nature. For holy Scripture doth set out unto us only the Name of Jesus Christ, whereby men must be saved."
Good example of how the formularies express what we find in scripture.
--------------------
Pete
Posts: 1653 | From: Kilburn, London NW6 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313
|
Posted
Your Excellency
It's not clear to me what you mean when you use words like liberalism and evangelicalism. Could you explain these terms the way you personally understand them? And what do you understand salvation by Jesus Christ alone to mean?
--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.
Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Comper's Child:
Is it really exactly that simple? I'd pose the question this way:
Is Jesus Christ the Way the Truth and the Light?
No doubt about it! I believe he is indeed and that no one comes to the Father except by him. But -how - that is isn't a simple equation in my mind. It's a mystery.
Too loosey goosey for you?
I'd prefer "The Way, the Truth and the Life" personally.
My impression, from what I've heard of her, is that KJS would disagree.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
++Rowan has been a bitter disappointment
To who? The editors of the Times and the Telegraph? Tony Blair? The British press has now tried a hatchet job on three successive Archbishops of Canterbury in my memory. They have been less successful against Rowan than they were against his predecessors.
Moast of those people I meet who who distrusted him at first have been won over. His reputation has grown amongst ordinary Christians in parishes. Especially those who have heard him preach.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chapelhead:
Do us CofE folk think that Jesus is the only way to God / salvation?
Well, I do.
And my personal opinion is that no-one who disagrees should be ordained.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave Marshall
Shipmate
# 7533
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Paige:
Just a comment on your assesment of ++Rowan's issue with us: TEC has been debating the homosexuality and women's ordination issues for decades. The fact that no one else in the AC could be bothered to notice until they didn't like the outcome is not TEC's fault. Everything we do, we do in public.
That's been my impression all along. I don't see you could or should have done anything differently. I suspect though that Rowan Williams is taking the line he is because other churches, perhaps including the C of E, take a more conservative line and he's giving the communion as much opportunity as he can to sort itself out.
Contrary to apparently popular opinion in TEC/ECUSA, as far as I understand the anglican communion he's not the boss. It's not his place to tell Nigeria or Sydney where to get off, nor sidle up to ECUSA because for example he happened to be personally sympathetic to their position on gays and women in the Church.
But then I do have a lot of time for RW, not least because he manages to talk about the Church in a way that does not exclude me. The flip side of that is I have to recognise that he's going to give the same consideration to the Nigerian church and the Sydney church and evangelicals in the Church of England.
So I'll be a little bit offended on his behalf when I hear crass little no backbone jibes from people who've just admitted they've no loyalty to church beyond their own back yard. Although I'm the same in that respect, I'll try to think hard before being gratuitously offensive about someone who takes a wider view.
Posts: 4763 | From: Derbyshire Dales | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paige
Shipmate
# 2261
|
Posted
Custard---as a universalist, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. And I believe that He saves all. Not just Christians.
So yes, I believe that Jesus is the only way we can come to God. But as Comper's Child says, the way He gets us there is a Mystery.
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
My impression, from what I've heard of her, is that KJS would disagree.
+KJS has a new book coming out next month. Why don't you read it before you go judging her theology?
+Pete--the 39 Articles aren't scripture, and I don't treat them as such.
Ken---++Rowan has disappointed ME. I recognize that I'm not important, but I'm not alone. He chastises TEC for doing what we did, showing a shameful ignorance about our way of doing things. He does not chastise the anti-TEC primates for border-crossing, or talking smack about gays and lesbians at every opportunity, or for their unconscionable rudeness to +KJS.
And, most especially, he does not chastise +Akinola for pushing legislation that would send gays and lesbians to prison (which, according to Nigerians I have talked with, is apparently the equivalent of a death sentence) merely for speaking out for their civil rights. That legislation is of the devil, and there is no excuse under the sun for ++Rowan to sit back and say nothing about it.
So he may be a wonderful preacher and a fine scholar---but as the ABC, he is a bitter, bitter disappointment.
--------------------
Sister Jackhammer of Quiet Reflection
Posts: 886 | From: Sweet Tea Land, USA | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spawn
Shipmate
# 4867
|
Posted
I'm going to be quite happy to lay into TEC tomorrow but only after tonight I've acknowledged its clear points of superiority over the Church of England.
1. Openness and accountability - I've been very critical of its General Convention at times. But in one main area it is preferable to the English system of government - that is in its openness. The Church of England is secretive, arcane and often duplicitous. TEC's system of government is open, unafraid of the outside world, and refreshingly honest.
2. The participation of laity - TEC is streets ahead of us in the CoE.
3. Enthusiasm - The Church of England remains suspicious of enthusiasm and very often lukewarm in faith. In my experience, TEC-ers have a much more entrepreneurial attitude to the ministry of the Church. Parishes often have ambitious and outward-looking projects and a can-do attitude to doing new things.
4. Liberal/Catholic churches can and do grow (sometimes quite spectacularly) in the Episcopal Church through their social ministries, open and warm worship, and their welcome of outsiders. I wish liberal Anglicans in the UK would sit up and take note. Remember that for years Anglican evangelicals have been selectively adopting church growth principles from the US, there's absolutely no reason why English liberals should not visit some of the more lively liberal churches in TEC to learn a few lessons in church growth and development.
5. Those of us who disagree with some of TEC's decisions, should take note of the fact that at least their wrongheadedness is motivated by a desire for justice and compassion. We should show more grace in return.
Posts: 3447 | From: North Devon | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Holding
Coffee and Cognac
# 158
|
Posted
Ken -- Rowan may be turning out to be a spectacularly good Primate of the Church of England.
He is failing miserably to be a competent, much less a successful, head/link of the Anglican Communion.
In almost every decision he's made, he's given into the conservatives without even considering an alternative point of view. He appears to have written off ECUSA and the ACC already, but not to have considered that close to half the other provinces in the COmmunion supported ECUSA and the ACC at the meeting of the Anglican Consultative COuncil. He's going to look a little odd if, as seems likely, both the Episcopal CHurch in Scotland and the CHurch in Wales leave with ECUSA and the ACC if they are forced out. And it will have to be forced out, because no-one on this side of the Atlantic is going to take again the way they were treated at the Primates' meeting or at the meeting of the ACC.
The commission he appointed some months ago included Bernard Malengo -- an archbishop who should be defrocked, in my opinion, for blatant corruption and clear violation of the minimum guidelines of christian behaviour. He acquiesced in despicable behaviour by certain provinces, led by Nigeria, at the meeting of the ACC. He refuses to condemn or even note behaviour from Nigeria and other conservative provinces that clearly contravenes the WIndsor guielines. And his latest appointment to a "convenant" committee -- when even the concept of a covenent is not agreed -- shows on the face of it a conservative bias that guarantees a split in the communion.
John
Posts: 5929 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
pete173
Shipmate
# 4622
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Paige:
+Pete--the 39 Articles aren't scripture, and I don't treat them as such.
Nor do I. What I said was "good example of how the formularies express what we find in scripture." Scripture teaches that Jesus Christ is the only way to salvation, and the Articles agree.
--------------------
Pete
Posts: 1653 | From: Kilburn, London NW6 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paige
Shipmate
# 2261
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Marshall:
Contrary to apparently popular opinion in TEC/ECUSA, as far as I understand the anglican communion he's not the boss. It's not his place to tell Nigeria or Sydney where to get off, nor sidle up to ECUSA because for example he happened to be personally sympathetic to their position on gays and women in the Church.
Dave--sorry, I cross-posted with you.
I understand he's not "The Boss," but communion with Canterbury has always been what "Anglican Communion" meant. The fact is, +Rowan could have said "Look, we don't agree on these issues, but we pray together and take the Eucharist together. TEC has operated according to its canons and in good order---and what they do is not what everyone has to do. Let's get back to spreading the Gospel, shall we?"
But no. He isn't "The Boss," but he could have been a leader---and he chose not to be.
Instead, he's tried to placate the most reactionary, hateful voices in the Communion at the expense of our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters, our women priests, and TEC and Canada.
The sad thing is that he can't placate them, because they don't want to be placated. So he'll have sold out his own principles, and the AC will break up anyway.
Spawn---I know that tomorrow you'll be trying to rip TEC a new one again, but for today...thank you. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
Sister Jackhammer of Quiet Reflection
Posts: 886 | From: Sweet Tea Land, USA | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paige
Shipmate
# 2261
|
Posted
I'm cross-posting right and left today...sorry.
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
Scripture teaches that Jesus Christ is the only way to salvation, and the Articles agree.
Funny, I don't remember Jesus cursing people for presuming to say that God is merciful and can save whom He pleases...
So I hope you'll forgive me if I don't take the 39 Articles as normative.
--------------------
Sister Jackhammer of Quiet Reflection
Posts: 886 | From: Sweet Tea Land, USA | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
quote:
Originally posted by Comper's Child:
Is it really exactly that simple? I'd pose the question this way:
Is Jesus Christ the Way the Truth and the Light?
No doubt about it! I believe he is indeed and that no one comes to the Father except by him. But -how - that is isn't a simple equation in my mind. It's a mystery.
Too loosey goosey for you?
I'd prefer "The Way, the Truth and the Life" personally.
My impression, from what I've heard of her, is that KJS would disagree.
Relevant quote from The Inclusive God , by Steven Shakespeare and Hugh Rayment-Pickard: quote:
What, though, of the text so often quoted by conservatives: 'I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me' (John 14)? Surely this says loud and clear that salvation is exclusive to followers of Jesus... But...if Jesus' 'way' is the path of a generous and non-judgemental love, then the path to the Father is not narrow dogmatism but an inclusive ethics.
Worry not, TECs/Ecusans, there are plenty in the C of E on your side. I can accept the fact that there are those like Custard who would (sensitively I hope) want to push a rigid interpretation of that saying, as long as they accept that the above is a vallid interpretation. IMHO it is more in tune with the character of Jesus as revealed in the gospels generally. I don't see why just on this particular passage we should have to take a fundamentalist interpretation or be driven out of the Church.
--------------------
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
|
|
Spawn
Shipmate
# 4867
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by John Holding:
The commission he appointed some months ago included Bernard Malengo -- an archbishop who should be defrocked, in my opinion, for blatant corruption and clear violation of the minimum guidelines of christian behaviour.
Yes, Malango's support for +Kunonga is a great scandal and a deep embarrassment.
quote:
He acquiesced in despicable behaviour by certain provinces, led by Nigeria, at the meeting of the ACC. He refuses to condemn or even note behaviour from Nigeria and other conservative provinces that clearly contravenes the WIndsor guielines.
He has written to Primates explicitly addressing the issue of homophobia and his disapproval of boundary crossing. I agree that he could show himself to be more even-handed and active. But in some ways, that's just not ++Rowan. I hope he is much more active in addressing some of these concerns behind the scenes.
quote:
And his latest appointment to a "convenant" committee -- when even the concept of a covenent is not agreed -- shows on the face of it a conservative bias that guarantees a split in the communion.
John
The concept of a covenant has been backed by the ACC and the Primates Meeting. These are the two competent bodies to act on the recommendations of the Windsor Report. Don't forget it is then the Provinces of the Anglican Communion which will have the final say on the Covenant. But a covenant doesn't necessarily lead to a straightforward split in the Communion - it could lead to a two-track solution. Those who want to belong to an Anglican Communion as it continues to develop, and those who want to be part of a looser federation. I suspect that this is the only hope that ++Rowan sees for maintaining some kind of unity. My view is that the whole thing will fragment over a long period of time anyway.
Posts: 3447 | From: North Devon | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rossweisse
High Church Valkyrie
# 2349
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
...I think American exceptionalism plays some part in our differences as well. It is far more likely that the C of E General Synod (and the Canadian one for example) would consider very carefully (and even be swayed) by what the rest of the Anglican Communion says to it directly on matters of importance and controversy. Many people in ECUSA couldn't give a flying f***.
And -- granting it for the sake of discussion (and I know there are SOME in ECUSA who feel that way) -- in this they differ from the African bishops just exactly how? Yes, their specific issues are different, but it's the same tendency to do what they want and the hell with the rest of the Communion. Do you have an equal problem with them?
Ross
--------------------
I'm not dead yet.
Posts: 15117 | From: Valhalla | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Originally posted by Chapelhead:
quote:
Do us CofE folk think that Jesus is the only way to God / salvation?
A question best answered in the great words of John Dryden:
quote:
And though no name be for salvation known
But that of His eternal Son alone,
Who knows how far transcending goodness can
Extend the merits of that Son to man?
Who knows what reasons may his mercy lead,
Or ignorance invincible may plead?
I think, broadly speaking, if one finds oneself to be less liberal than a seventeenth century Catholic caught up in the religious controversies of the later Stuart period, one probably ought to have a quiet word with oneself.
--------------------
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
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
