|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Wycliffe Hall in trouble
|
Charles Read
Shipmate
# 3963
|
Posted
Grey Face- there is some truth in what you say but in fact all the regional / diocesan courses are staffed by teams of mixed churchpersonship. I suspect that Reform type evangelicals and FinF type catholics do not feature much on the core staff though. I think most courses do a reasonable job of training people in their own tradition as well as educating them about others. For OLM schemes, the local incumbent acts as mentor in this.
Arietty - I actually think the party nature of colleges is OK so long as:
1. they prepare students for the C of E in all its variety
2. they are willing to take a range of students - as they all do nowadays, due to the local / regional aspect which you point up
--------------------
"I am a sinful human being - why do you expect me to be consistent?" George Bebawi
"This is just unfocussed wittering." Ian McIntosh
Posts: 701 | From: Norwich | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arrietty
Ship's borrower
# 45
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Read:
I actually think the party nature of colleges is OK so long as:
1. they prepare students for the C of E in all its variety
2. they are willing to take a range of students - as they all do nowadays, due to the local / regional aspect which you point up
Isn't that pretty much the concern, in fact? That Wycliffe is being moved to a position where it will do neither?
--------------------
i-church
Online Mission and Ministry
Posts: 6634 | From: Coventry, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
From my encounters with the CofE in various locations, I think it is far healthier when churches inhabit definite traditions. The bland one-size-fits-all-lets-pretend-we-all-agree-ism of CofE PLC is a turn-off. Moreover, I have met some people who have trained on 'non-party' courses, the danger with whom is that they think they understand evangelicals/ Anglo-Catholics/ liberals.
It is important that those training for ordination need to be formed in such a way that they respect other traditions and understand the basic theological premises of those traditions*. I don't think this need involve training everyone together. A beefed up version of the kind of approach already in place in Oxford and Cambridge, with federated colleges of definite tradition, seems adequate to me.
*I think it is understanding the beliefs that matters. Another observation about the clergy I criticise above is that they often assume tradition to be a matter of worship-style, ergo I understand Catholics because I too like using incense. Very few Anglo-Catholics or evangelicals would take worship style to be the defining feature of their tradition.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Read:
I actually think the party nature of colleges is OK so long as:
1. they prepare students for the C of E in all its variety
2. they are willing to take a range of students - as they all do nowadays, due to the local / regional aspect which you point up
(I speak as one trained in a college (evangelical) and who would have originally defended the college system but - for reasons that will become clear - has now changed his mind)
Charles,
I think that your two provisos above are why I am less and less inclined to defend the college system. Firstly, I am not sure that the colleges really do effectively prepare ordinands "for the Cof E in all its variety". If you go prepared to be changed and challenged, you'll find you are. If you go determined to stay pretty much as you are on entering college, it is rare (in my admittedly limited experience) that you will really challenged. I know of too many people who came to college from large suburban evangelical churches and stayed within their comfort zone all through college and then returned to serve curacies in large, suburban evangelical churches. Most of these people I wouldn't less loose near a UPA parish, or an area of high multi-racial mixture, or a rural group of 6 or 7 parishes. They would flounder and, in so doing, would drag the parishes down with them.
(Please note that whilst I speak about people from evangelical backgrounds, I suspect that the same can be said of other backgrounds. I simply have less experience of these)
Secondly, whilst colleges ARE required to take a range of students because of the regional aspects mentioned, I am not sure that they really do much to accommodate people who have chosen the college simply because of its location and whose church tradition is very different from that of the ethos of the college. To take a simple example, if someone from an AC background opts for Trinity in Bristol, simply because they have family in Devon or Cornwall and need to be near them, how much does Trinity do to accommodate such people? Or are they expected to simply fit in with the college ethos, no matter how alien it is for them personally?
(I'm not picking on Trinity here - for all I know they may do a wonderful job in such cases. But from my knowledge, I doubt that this is very often the case)
The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that the best way forward would be for a fundamental shake-up of the present system. Let there still be the chance to train in colleges or on non-residential courses, but once that decision has been made, the only other choice should be purely geographical. Want to train in a college in the West Country? Go to Trinity, knowing that it will be properly accommodating to ordinands from all parts of the C of E. Let's have evangelicals, anglo-catholics and liberals training together, each experiencing the worship and spirituality of the other, having the chance to be shaped and challenged by one another.
My involvement with lay pastoral training courses in the diocese indicates that lay people from all sorts of backgrounds can train together and very quickly come to understand and appreciate traditions very different from their own. The support they show one another is often remarkable. Why can't ordinands do the same?
Part of the problem in the C of E at the moment stems from the fact that those of the different factions or traditions have less and less understanding of one another. Until this is addressed, the splintering into ever smaller factions will just continue.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
From my encounters with the CofE in various locations, I think it is far healthier when churches inhabit definite traditions. The bland one-size-fits-all-lets-pretend-we-all-agree-ism of CofE PLC is a turn-off. Moreover, I have met some people who have trained on 'non-party' courses, the danger with whom is that they think they understand evangelicals/ Anglo-Catholics/ liberals.
It is important that those training for ordination be formed in such a way that they respect other traditions and understand the basic theological premises of those traditions*. I don't think this need involve training everyone together. A beefed up version of the kind of approach already in place in Oxford and Cambridge, with federated colleges of definite tradition, seems adequate to me.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
Most of these people I wouldn't less loose near a UPA parish, or an area of high multi-racial mixture, or a rural group of 6 or 7 parishes. They would flounder and, in so doing, would drag the parishes down with them.
But unless they are ever likely to apply for a job in any of these locations, why is this such a disaster?
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
Most of these people I wouldn't less loose near a UPA parish, or an area of high multi-racial mixture, or a rural group of 6 or 7 parishes. They would flounder and, in so doing, would drag the parishes down with them.
But unless they are ever likely to apply for a job in any of these locations, why is this such a disaster? I would be dreadful in either an evangelical or a rural parish. Since I have no intention of ever going to either - unless God has some very weird ideas indeed - I'm not really sure this constitutes a great crisis for the CofE. What does constitute a crisis is the proliferation of blandness.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
I think I prefer different colleges as well. I rather like the evangelical CofE. It is (in English-speaking countries at any rate) pretty near unique in all sorts of ways. I suspect it would hardly exist if there was a one-training-fits-all approach.
The quid pro quo of that is that we let the other lot have their colleges as well. Fair enough. Why not?
Let a hundred flowers bloom and all that. I don't want all our parishes to be the same. I like the weirdness and the difference of our little traditions.
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
Want to train in a college in the West Country? Go to Trinity, knowing that it will be properly accommodating to ordinands from all parts of the C of E. Let's have evangelicals, anglo-catholics and liberals training together, each experiencing the worship and spirituality of the other, having the chance to be shaped and challenged by one another.
They might have worked twenty years ago, I don't think it can with FiF and others making the ordination of women their Shibboleth for party mambership. If a college is going to base its training on a common sacramental life together, AND a significant body of studens rejects the ordination of women, I don't see how they can mix in with the rest of us and still feel "peroperly accomodated" Half of what is done in chapel would seem unbearable to them. More so when we have women bishops. (Evangelical opponents of women priests don't have the problem in quite the same way) I doubt if there is a stronger supporter of the ordination of women here than me. But I don't actually want to kick FiF and their friends out of the Church of England if they are willing to stay and I suspect that if they are going to stay in they will have to in effect look after their own training. Separate colleges or courses is probably less disruptive than having a no-girls-allowed club inside a college which I fear might happen.
quote:
Part of the problem in the C of E at the moment stems from the fact that those of the different factions or traditions have less and less understanding of one another. Until this is addressed, the splintering into ever smaller factions will just continue
I'm not sure that colleges are the place to address that. It is parishes that matter, and lay people more than clergy. I'm also not sure its true. It seems to me that evangelicals now are on the whole much more open to influences from other parts of the CofE than we were thirty years ago.
I also think I mildly resent the implication that evangelicals, or specifically conservative evangelicals are less likely to cope with a UPA parish. I just don't think that's generally true. The idea that evangelical Anglicans are somehow more upper-middle-class or culturally isolated than other Anglicans is false. But we had another thread about that.
--------------------
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 Arrietty:
With all due respect Custard, you can't possibly know what individual students have been told/advised. The college has the power of ministerial life or death over you as they get to write the final report which ends with a statement that they either recommend you or don't recommend you to be deaconed.
What if I was at an open meeting for any students where we were explicitly told that people with blogs or who posted on internet forums could say what they wanted? (which I was)
On the subject of regional courses, I have yet to see a single ordinand from a regional course who I think was adequately prepared for ministry in a conservative evangelical Anglican church. There may be some out there, but I haven't met them.
[ 25. September 2007, 17:10: Message edited by: Custard. ]
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
I also think I mildly resent the implication that evangelicals, or specifically conservative evangelicals are less likely to cope with a UPA parish.
To be fair, the comment was made about suburban evangelicals. I think it was probably correct. But then again, exactly the same comment could be made about Haydn-at-every-Mass and Tio-Pepe-for-apres-Mass-refreshments type Anglo-Catholics.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
I have yet to see a single ordinand from a regional course who I think was adequately prepared for ministry in a conservative evangelical Anglican church.
What was missing?
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Manipled Mutineer
Shipmate
# 11514
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Manipled Mutineer:
I had simply assumed from the name that Ridley was an evangelical establishment (
It is.
Did anyone say it wasn't?
My misunderstanding of Charles Read's point below, I think:
quote:
One hears of anti-evangelical atmospheres in some places - I have not seen it in the eastern region - indeed Ridley Hall is in partnership with us
--------------------
Collecting Catholic and Anglo-
Catholic books
Posts: 1533 | From: Glamorgan, UK | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
I have yet to see a single ordinand from a regional course who I think was adequately prepared for ministry in a conservative evangelical Anglican church.
What was missing?
The usual. Ability and desire to do a good, interesting and challenging 30 minute Biblical exposition.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
innocent(ish)
Shipmate
# 12691
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
I have yet to see a single ordinand from a regional course who I think was adequately prepared for ministry in a conservative evangelical Anglican church.
What was missing?
The usual. Ability and desire to do a good, interesting and challenging 30 minute Biblical exposition.
Which explains why the +4 colleges don't make the grade. I spent two years at one and I won't (and wouldn't want to) do a 30 minute exposition. Personally, I get bored with the sound of my own voice after 15.
We could get on to a discussion about why learning styles are important. It's all very well being able to preach for 30 mins, but what about the huge percentage of the population who learn visually or kinaesthetically?
Maybe a question for another thread..
--------------------
"Christianity has become part of the furniture ... like a grand piano nobody plays any longer.I want the dust to be taken off and people to play music." Archbishop John Sentamu
Posts: 109 | From: Rochester | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
I also think I mildly resent the implication that evangelicals, or specifically conservative evangelicals are less likely to cope with a UPA parish. I just don't think that's generally true. The idea that evangelical Anglicans are somehow more upper-middle-class or culturally isolated than other Anglicans is false. But we had another thread about that.
Sorry if that is how you read it - because that wasn't how I meant it.
The point I was trying to make was not about evangelicals per se, but about a growing inability to be flexible enough to minister outside the sometimes narrowly defined boundaries of someone's background. I was using a specific group of people (who happened to be suburban, affluent evangelicals) to illustrate what I perceive to be a much wider problem.
It has been my joy(?!) recently to be looking for a new post. As a result, I have had many conversations with archdeacons and loads of other people involved in the search for suitable applicants for parishes. One common theme that has emerged from almost every conversation has been the frustration that so many clergy are so patently ill-equipped to transfer out of the contexts (both social and ecclesiastical) in which they have worshipped and ministered for so long.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arrietty
Ship's borrower
# 45
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
quote:
Originally posted by Arrietty:
With all due respect Custard, you can't possibly know what individual students have been told/advised. The college has the power of ministerial life or death over you as they get to write the final report which ends with a statement that they either recommend you or don't recommend you to be deaconed.
What if I was at an open meeting for any students where we were explicitly told that people with blogs or who posted on internet forums could say what they wanted? (which I was)
I think the qualifier 'wisely' covers that. Especially if you were then told elsewhere that it would be 'unwise' to post your particular views.
I have to say I'm intrigued by the breadth of knowledge you claim about what's happening in a large number of churches. What were you before you went into training? A Bishop?
--------------------
i-church
Online Mission and Ministry
Posts: 6634 | From: Coventry, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scribehunter
Shipmate
# 12750
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
I have yet to see a single ordinand from a regional course who I think was adequately prepared for ministry in a conservative evangelical Anglican church.
What was missing?
The usual. Ability and desire to do a good, interesting and challenging 30 minute Biblical exposition.
On the other hand I have met a few ordinands who thought that they were adequately prepared for ministry even though all they could do were 30 minute Bible expositions.
Posts: 143 | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dinghy Sailor
Ship's Jibsheet
# 8507
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nightlamp:
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
I think Honest Ron Bacardi is right on this one.
quote:
Yet it is RT's stated aim to make Wycliffe more conservative.
Where?
In the reform video there is no other way to understand what he was saying.
It was my interpretation that he was blatantly playing to the crowd: he was pressing all the right buttons that make many Reform folk just lap it up. It was quite embarrassing, actually.
--------------------
Preach Christ, because this old humanity has used up all hopes and expectations, but in Christ hope lives and remains.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Posts: 2821 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dinghy Sailor:
quote:
Originally posted by Nightlamp:
In the reform video there is no other way to understand what he was saying.
It was my interpretation that he was blatantly playing to the crowd: he was pressing all the right buttons that make many Reform folk just lap it up. It was quite embarrassing, actually.
I think he let his guard down and he said what his real objectives were. He has plenty of time to issue clarification statement. I doubt he was being deceitful to Reform.
--------------------
I don't know what you are talking about so it couldn't have been that important- Nightlamp
Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arrietty
Ship's borrower
# 45
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Scribehunter:
On the other hand I have met a few ordinands who thought that they were adequately prepared for ministry even though all they could do were 30 minute Bible expositions.
Yep, strangely the 30 minute exegitical sermon doesn't come in particularly useful in pastoral visits to ill or distressed people, at crematorium funerals where you are expected to be in and out within half an hour, at baptisms and weddings where you've got people waiting to get in for the next one, at PCCs where people usually want to get home before midnight, at midweek communions where they don't have a sermon, at 8 o' clock services where people are waiting to set up for the 9 o' clock service, at school assemblies, school carol services, midnight masses or in any situation where most of the people you're talking to may just about know that Jesus is something to do with the church but apart from that are pretty hazy about the Bible.
Maybe if you work in a conservative evangelical setting you don't have to get into any of those situations.
--------------------
i-church
Online Mission and Ministry
Posts: 6634 | From: Coventry, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
moonlitdoor
Shipmate
# 11707
|
Posted
Surely Custard just said it was necessary for a priest in his sort of church to be able to preach a good 30 minute sermon. He didn't say or suggest that it is all that is necessary.
--------------------
We've evolved to being strange monkeys, but in the next life he'll help us be something more worthwhile - Gwai
Posts: 2210 | From: london | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
One common theme that has emerged from almost every conversation has been the frustration that so many clergy are so patently ill-equipped to transfer out of the contexts (both social and ecclesiastical) in which they have worshipped and ministered for so long.
How terribly inconvenient for the Church's middle management that some clergy have beliefs, principles and preferences. I just praise the Lord that there weren't Anglican archdeacons in the time of St Paul: 'Paul, we've noticed you've spent most of your ministry working with Gentiles. Don't you feel the need for a new challenge?'
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pokrov
Shipmate
# 11515
|
Posted
Re: the 30 minute exposition (been there, preached that - takes about 10-12 hours to prepare), I've sometimes wondered whether the more one de-liturgises and de-sacramentalises the community 'worship' the more work the homily needs to do.
It's like a whole 'experience' of learning throughout the service get's concentrated into an intense 30 minutes, preceeded by some 'warm up' singing.
I've heard it said that post-reformation worship looks more like a lecture with singing, than the synagogue+temple praxis of early Christian understanding.
--------------------
Most Holy Theotokos pray for us!
Posts: 1469 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stranger in a strange land
Shipmate
# 11922
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Read:
[QUOTE] ...One hears of anti-evangelical atmospheres in some places - I have not seen it in the eastern region ...
Indeed: it is the few catholics among students and staff who feel under pressure.
Posts: 608 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
One common theme that has emerged from almost every conversation has been the frustration that so many clergy are so patently ill-equipped to transfer out of the contexts (both social and ecclesiastical) in which they have worshipped and ministered for so long.
How terribly inconvenient for the Church's middle management that some clergy have beliefs, principles and preferences. I just praise the Lord that there weren't Anglican archdeacons in the time of St Paul: 'Paul, we've noticed you've spent most of your ministry working with Gentiles. Don't you feel the need for a new challenge?'
How stupid that comment is.
This isn't about beliefs or principles - it is about the inability of some clergy in a supposedly national church to be able to adapt to anything other than "what they are used to". No one is asking people to give up their own principles, simply to be able to use them in differing circumstances and contexts.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
Liberalism, the ideology that doesn't recognise itself as an ideology....
It is about principles. Many evangelicals actually believe that justification by faith, say, and it being preached is importance. It therefore helps that they have a minister who actually believes the doctrine. Ditto, Catholics and the Real Presence. It is only those who don't believe very much - disproportionately represented in the hierarchy - who think it is all a matter of style and context.
Were I, Oscar, to think the entire church and clergy ought to conform to principles I find acceptible, you would quite rightly denounce me as a bigot.
When you do it you are a realistic, broad-minded, scion of the forward-looking dynamic church for the 21st century. Or something.
And let's not forget the laity in all of this. The people who come to my church, in the main, expect priests who believe Catholic things and are comfortable with Catholic worship. The next door parish expects the same, only replace 'Catholic' with 'evangelical'. That's how the CofE works. And it does work. Until unimaginitive so-and-sos, who have only ever felt passion when completing a particular complex diocesan return, start trying to mess with it.
[ 26. September 2007, 10:12: Message edited by: Divine Outlaw Dwarf ]
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
I have yet to see a single ordinand from a regional course who I think was adequately prepared for ministry in a conservative evangelical Anglican church.
What was missing?
The usual. Ability and desire to do a good, interesting and challenging 30 minute Biblical exposition.
And what did they have that you don't?
The ability to do an interesting and challenging 30 minute Biblical expositon isn't the be all and end all for a minister. (Although I appreciate as a card carrying Baptist, I've probably posted something akin to heresy!)
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
Surely Custard just said it was necessary for a priest in his sort of church to be able to preach a good 30 minute sermon. He didn't say or suggest that it is all that is necessary.
Sometimes it's what people don't say that gives the game away
Tubbs
[ 26. September 2007, 10:41: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
It is about principles. Many evangelicals actually believe that justification by faith, say, and it being preached is importance. It therefore helps that they have a minister who actually believes the doctrine. Ditto, Catholics and the Real Presence. It is only those who don't believe very much - disproportionately represented in the hierarchy - who think it is all a matter of style and context.
Tangent, I know. But I doubt if I'm the only one who is uneasy with this line of argument. The C of E as a federation of differing sects is all very well to a point. But if you really believe that the C of E is catholic you should be able to go, say, to the evangelical vicar down the road and make your confession, just as if you identify as evangelical, you should expect to hear the gospel faith proclaimed by Fr Spike at St Tatifilarious.
Most anglican churches outside of the big cities are 'the' church for their neighbourhood, and whatever the worship style or theological tendency of the incumbent and regular worshippers, can't behave as if the rest of the Church didn't exist.
The reality of anglo-catholic clergy ministering to evangelical congregations, and vice-versa, is not just because the bland MOTR managers prefer it that way, it is inevitable. People are more mobile and so often turn up in churches of an unfamiliar tradition; and neighbouring parishes (for a long time in the country, and more and more now in cities) are having to share priests. This need not mean that the evangelical is just 'dressing up' or that the catholic is compromising his/her principles. It should be about each gaining a real insight into the riches of the other tradition.
Which, to get back to the OP, means that sectarian forms of anglicanism such as are becoming, apparently, entrenched at Wycliffe are not helpful, nor are they anglican.
[ 26. September 2007, 11:14: Message edited by: Angloid ]
--------------------
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
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
It is about principles. Many evangelicals actually believe that justification by faith, say, and it being preached is importance. It therefore helps that they have a minister who actually believes the doctrine. Ditto, Catholics and the Real Presence. It is only those who don't believe very much - disproportionately represented in the hierarchy - who think it is all a matter of style and context.
Tangent, I know. But I doubt if I'm the only one who is uneasy with this line of argument. The C of E as a federation of differing sects is all very well to a point. But if you really believe that the C of E is catholic you should be able to go, say, to the evangelical vicar down the road and make your confession, just as if you identify as evangelical, you should expect to hear the gospel faith proclaimed by Fr Spike at St Tatifilarious.
I think I started the tangent. I agree with the above. I don't think it mitigates anything I said.
quote:
Most anglican churches outside of the big cities are 'the' church for their neighbourhood, and whatever the worship style or theological tendency of the incumbent and regular worshippers, can't behave as if the rest of the Church didn't exist.
This is true (stressing the 'most'). I think that some clergy are more suited to this type of ministry than others. Not a problem for my view.
quote:
It should be about each gaining a real insight into the riches of the other tradition.
Which, to get back to the OP, means that sectarian forms of anglicanism such as are becoming, apparently, entrenched at Wycliffe are not helpful, nor are they anglican.
The first paragraph I agree with. I just think that in order for us to do it, the traditions need to actually exist somewhere, and not in 'Lite' form.
Regarding the second: my problem with Reform et. al. is not that they are 'entrenched'. If they really were entrenched that would be fine. They could sing to themselves in the ghetto. The problem is precisely the opposite. They want to form everyone in their own image. They have this in common with many managerial liberals: only the latter do the forming in an impeccably middle class, polite and non-extreme fashion, and are therefore pragmatists rather than fundamentalists.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266
|
Posted
I have just discovered another thread on this subject but with a post from a formal tutor of Wycliffe found here
--------------------
I don't know what you are talking about so it couldn't have been that important- Nightlamp
Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arrietty
Ship's borrower
# 45
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
It is about principles. Many evangelicals actually believe that justification by faith, say, and it being preached is importance. It therefore helps that they have a minister who actually believes the doctrine. Ditto, Catholics and the Real Presence. It is only those who don't believe very much - disproportionately represented in the hierarchy - who think it is all a matter of style and context.
Actually when you're in place where clergy are in short supply it's remarkable how little anyone is interested in your beliefs or what 'party' you may belong to. My cohort of curates are starting to look for jobs and we all get asked 'Will you come and be our vicar?' on a regular basis by people who know nothing about our practice or style, just how we come across as people. That's what seems to matter to most ordinary church members in the end actually - what sort of person you are rather than what sort of church party you identify with.
And as it becomes increasingly rare to have just one church to think about, most stipendiary clergy are going to have to adapt to a variety of styles within the group, team or benefice. A friend in a very evangelical church has just taken his first communion service at the very Catholic church with whom they are forming a team, he had to learn how to do all the 'stuff' but put himself totally at the service of the people he was ministering to.
'Liturgy' is actually the work of the people, not of the priest.
--------------------
i-church
Online Mission and Ministry
Posts: 6634 | From: Coventry, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arrietty:
'Liturgy' is actually the work of the people, not of the priest.
Actually, I think, it is first and foremost the work of Christ, in which the Church participates. But, taking your point: yes, you're right - but this doesn't counter me. There are churches where the people want priests of a certain tradition. Without getting overly personal, you are possibly not training at an institution where you are likely to encounter them in the title-finding process. I think it is important that the People of God in these places are served. There are other churches which are not like this. Fine. And of course staffing needs to be taken into account: although I'm not uncritical of dioceses which combine parishes left, right and centre whilst still finding the money to employ lots of full-time advisers for this, that and the other. But, within the bounds of possibility, I think it is good that diversity is nurtured, and the specificality of both clergy and congregations recognised. Basically, a plea for pluralism - which oughtn't to be that odd.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
And let's not forget the laity in all of this. The people who come to my church, in the main, expect priests who believe Catholic things and are comfortable with Catholic worship. The next door parish expects the same, only replace 'Catholic' with 'evangelical'. That's how the CofE works. And it does work. Until unimaginitive so-and-sos, who have only ever felt passion when completing a particular complex diocesan return, start trying to mess with it.
I find this attitude a bit discouraging.
I'm all for parishes having distinctive strengths but you seem to be saying it's a good thing to have the country segregated into catholic and evangelical parishes with little contact between the two. I'm not sure where the concept of communion fits into that and it seems to be a defeatist attitude if you think it's at all good for one party to learn from another - for evangelicals to begin to appreciate more catholic doctrines for example.
In much (most?) of the country the difference between an Anglo-Catholic shrine and a robust bastion of sixteenth century Puritan iconoclasm is considerably more than a two minute Tube ride. Strong and narrowly-focussed party affiliations effectively rule out the possibility of moving between the parties as consciences and study lead, or condemn many Anglo-Catholics in the wrong place to dissatisfaction with their worship and church life. And vice versa, I hasten to add.
Furthermore, as the overwhelming majority (I suppose - I'm open to correction) of people training on courses are going to regional training centres and ministering after ordination in the same region, a significant party affiliation in the regional centres will cause an intensification of the dominant affiliation in the region. If regional/course training became the norm and Cranmer Hall became Reform-orientated for example, then it would be only a matter of time before it would be essentially impossible to worship as a catholic Anglican in Durham. I didn't pick on Cranmer for any reason other than proximity, I hasten to add.
So what is needed in my humble but admittedly long-winded opinion is a system of training whereby as far as possible, priests are trained to appreciate and have deep knowledge of Anglican traditions other than their own to the extent that if called to do so they can minister to Anglicans of those persuasions particularly whose of whose souls they have the cure, and if necessary minister in a parish that isn't a precise fit without stripping the altars and smashing the stained glass at the first opportunity.
Now, some might say and indeed have said we've just about got this already and that our affiliated colleges and training centres impart sufficient knowledge to enable the kind of things I've been going on about. If so then all well and good but even then it's worth remembering the dangers of overspecialisation.
Finally, I don't see why it has to be the case that to teach and train priests who can cope in most places, you must chuck the baby out with the bathwater and start to produce a kind of bland not-really-anything don't-scare-the-horses rubbish that has no faith, no commitment and no belief. Obviously that's a danger but if the broad church concept is kept in mind at all times I don't see why it's inevitable. Take MOTR parishes. And keep them. No, seriously, the middle of the road can be the boring grey bit where nothing happens or it can pull in good things from all over the periphery. Some compromise is necessary but not as much as might be expected. Evangelicals might require sound biblical teaching. Is that really incompatible with catholicism? Catholics require sound traditional teaching and liturgical practice. Is that really incompatible with evangelicalism? Liberals require freedom to explore. Is that really incompatible with other approaches? I say not, but it requires leaders who understand the full breadth to run such a place.
Climbs down off soapbox...
{ETA: crossposted several times over. Should type more quickly.}
[ 26. September 2007, 12:13: Message edited by: GreyFace ]
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
But, within the bounds of possibility, I think it is good that diversity is nurtured, and the specificality of both clergy and congregations recognised. Basically, a plea for pluralism - which oughtn't to be that odd.
DoD: I was beginning to think that your post in reply to mine meant that we basically agreed. But I'm not convinced by this 'plea for pluralism' - there's a good way of understanding this, but it could be a justification for the consumerist approach (cf this thread in Ecclesiantics). And it can be a superficial way of papering over the cracks in the Anglican compromise... in other words a strategy beloved of managerial bishops and bland archdeacons everywhere.
But back to Wycliffe...
--------------------
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
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
Greyface, I was not arguing for 'little contact'. On the contrary, I think that once we are confident within our own traditions, and realise that we continue to have a valued place, that we are able to work alongside each other. It is when one suspects 'they' are about to close you down that the barricades go up. I do also think that you are much more able to take the general position you do because you are much closer to the middle of the road than I am. I repeat my point about liberals being blind to their own ideological nature.
Angloid, I don't agree with the consumerist approach either. How would I differentiate my position from it? Something to do with depth of conviction, lack of superficiality and the inhabiting of a world view. But, as you rightly say, back to Wycliffe...
[ 26. September 2007, 12:31: Message edited by: Divine Outlaw Dwarf ]
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
For the record, I don't think that ability and desire to do a good 30 minute expository sermon is the only thing clergy should be able to do. Of course it isn't.
It is, however, (along with some degree of holiness of life) the top priority for conservative evangelical churches when looking for a new minister.
And as an evangelical, I'd want to add that the kind of text-handling and theological skills needed to do the sermon are also useful for 1-1 pastoral work and so on. Of course other skills are needed as well...
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
It is when one suspects 'they' are about to close you down that the barricades go up.
Fair comment but perhaps this fear would be lessened if one could for example learn Anglo-Catholicism properly in the majority of training establishments in England rather than being restricted to Staggers or Mirfield* particularly when the regional/course people can't get to either. Being able to do this alongside people learning Sydney-Calvinism might be a compromise worth considering.
quote:
I do also think that you are much more able to take the general position you do because you are much closer to the middle of the road than I am. I repeat my point about liberals being blind to their own ideological nature.
Perhaps. I'm certainly worshipping and living in a MOTR context but that's for logistical and strategic reasons (PM me if you really want to know) and I wouldn't say I was either MOTR or liberal myself. Were the CofE to shatter into a) Anglo-Catholic, b) Evangelical, c) MOTR and d) Liberal quadrants and my logistical and strategic factors to disappear, my order of preference would be e), a), c), d) and b) with e) being a ferry ride across the Bosphorus. So categorise me from that if you will!
* Apologies to any other A-C colleges I don't know about.
Wycliffe? Where is that again? ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
I think those of us who are priests in the A-C tradition would say that it is something one is formed in, rather than learned on an Anglo-Catholicism 101 course. It is not just the way one learns theology, or the fact that one is shown how to light charcoals, but an immersion in a way of prayer, communal living etc. I think (hope) we have something to offer the wider church. The Fire And The Clay, written some years ago by people from Mirfield, makes this point well.
I do think, however, that non-AC colleges and courses should have Anglo-Catholicism 101 courses. Just as Staggers, Mirfield and Westcott should do Evangelicism 101.
Wycliffe; I believe it is just north of Oxford city centre.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266
|
Posted
Google is a great thing any one I have found this transcript
a quote from it
quote:
Presenter: 'can I ask you about some of those people who're also leaving for one reason or another, do you wonder...what is your understanding of the circumstances in which Elaine Storkey is leaving? Is it your understanding that she has been dismissed?'
Eeva: 'Yes it is, I know that she had absolutely no intention of leaving, she had in fact been preparing teaching material for the coming academic year.'
--------------------
I don't know what you are talking about so it couldn't have been that important- Nightlamp
Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
I accept what you're saying Fr DOD but isn't it then impossible to become an A-C priest on a course... unless you live near Oxford or Dewsbury? Don't you see a real concern that A-Cism will become restricted to the vicinities of these places as a result?
And to get back to Wycliffe, doesn't your argument mean that a conservative evangelical takeover - whether or not that's what's actually happening, I suspect it isn't - would be a good thing given that all but one of the other colleges are probably better described as open evangelical?
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
Thanks for the correction, please add Cambridge to my list of AC-friendly places.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
When I was at Staggers - a phrase I dread on the lips of others - there were (IIRC) two ordinands from the diocese of Oxford. There were far more from Blackburn, South Wales, various bits of Yorkshire and the South West. Unless things have very radically changed, locality is less marked at colleges with definite traditions.
I don't think there being another conservative evangelical college per se is a bad thing. My concerns about Wycliffe would be (a.) whether staff have been treated justly, (b.) whether the guy can work with the University and (c.) whether he, and those he is forming, are prepared to exist peaceably alongside Anglicans who differ from them.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
If regional/course training became the norm and Cranmer Hall became Reform-orientated for example, then it would be only a matter of time before it would be essentially impossible to worship as a catholic Anglican in Durham. I didn't pick on Cranmer for any reason other than proximity, I hasten to add.
I assume you mean the diocese/county rather than the city, given that there aren't any 'catholic Anglican' churches in the city anymore.
Thurible
--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."
Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
I suppose technically I meant the region from which those restricted by rule or practical considerations would be going to Cranmer. I don't know how closely that matches diocesan or county boundaries. But you got the gist.
I'm not sure it's worth putting that one in your sig, Thurible
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
My concerns about Wycliffe would be (a.) whether staff have been treated justly
In my opinion, it looks as if they have, though I feel sorry for Andrew Goddard. Of course, that is only my opinion; I don't know all the details, and there may be legal discussion about it later, which means I probably shouldn't say much more than I already have.
quote:
(b.) whether the guy can work with the University
that remains to be seen, but he is as well positioned as any of the other principals of PPHs to do so. Much of the relating to and working with the university is done by and via Peter Southwell, which will probably get more difficult once he retires. But that would happen anyway.
quote:
(c.) whether he, and those he is forming, are prepared to exist peaceably alongside Anglicans who differ from them.
Of the students I know at Wycliffe, I can only think of one who would be against the existence of Pusey House, and he's not an Anglican ordinand. I know several who go to Pusey / Mary Mags / Merton chapel regularly, and many more who have been occasionally and benefited from it.
Richard asked the Vice Principal from Staggers to teach Ethics at Wycliffe.
We're prepared to co-exist happily, have joint services occasionally, etc.
I suspect you'd get a wider range of views on whether evangelical churches should be required to support non-evangelical ones, which is largely what the Covenant mess was about.
[ 26. September 2007, 13:44: Message edited by: Custard. ]
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arrietty
Ship's borrower
# 45
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
Without getting overly personal, you are possibly not training at an institution where you are likely to encounter them in the title-finding process.
I'm not at college, I've just completed the third year of my curacy and having started as the NSM curate of one fairly high church I am now stipendiary curate to the whole team of 4 urban churches of varying traditions and in very different areas from UPA to fairly prosperous.
Where you start off isn't necessarily where you end up either in your curacy or later on. Half the adverts in the Church Times are for posts in newly formed teams which the existing clergy have had to accomodate.
[ 26. September 2007, 13:46: Message edited by: Arrietty ]
--------------------
i-church
Online Mission and Ministry
Posts: 6634 | From: Coventry, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Most anglican churches outside of the big cities are 'the' church for their neighbourhood, and whatever the worship style or theological tendency of the incumbent and regular worshippers, can't behave as if the rest of the Church didn't exist.
Surely even small cities? Maybe any town at all that is large enough to have more than one parish church.
Thinking of smaller cities, Brighton and Preston both clearly have the whole range of Anglican churchpersonships - with the default in Brighton perhaps being a long way further up the candle than in Preston
Going down another size level, of the places I have been to more than one church in, Durham is probably not relevant because it is such an ecclesiastically peculiar place, but Chichester has at least one down-the-line Charismatic evo church and another "low" church as well as the locally default AC. Worthing has a large team parish of very strong evangelicalism at Broadwater (or did five years ago when I last went there) that certainly doesn't cater to a sacramental approach.
Lewes is even smaller, but has one very evangelical parish at Southover and a couple of AC shrines.
Woodbridge in Suffolk is even more even smaller and has only two parishes in the centre. St Mary's is high, St. John's low.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
For the record, I don't think that ability and desire to do a good 30 minute expository sermon is the only thing clergy should be able to do. Of course it isn't.
It is, however, (along with some degree of holiness of life) the top priority for conservative evangelical churches when looking for a new minister.
And as an evangelical, I'd want to add that the kind of text-handling and theological skills needed to do the sermon are also useful for 1-1 pastoral work and so on. Of course other skills are needed as well...
Having re-checked the Husband’s preaching module from his Baptist ministry course, the length of sermon they advise is 20 minutes, give or take a few minutes either side. On the grounds that it’s very difficult for even the most gifted of preachers to hold people’s attention for any longer. It seems odd that there’s such a fixation on 30 minutes sermons with sections of the CofE.
The thing is, although every church says they want someone who’s a gifted preacher, they also say they want someone who’s good at pastoral care, admin (!) etc. So a good all rounder can be a better appointment than someone who’s very gifted in one area. And, as a rule of thumb, ministers who are very gifted at one thing seem to have a massive ministerial blind spot in at least one other. Oddly enough, ime, there seems to be a correlation between preaching gifts and pastoral care. All the ministers I’ve had who’ve been gifted preachers have been pretty crap at pastoral care – and often work better in a team ministry where there are others to fill the gaps.
I do have the feeling that a lot of the CofE con evo churches that you’re talking about will end up learning that the hard way.
The Husband has also pointed out, if I understood him correctly, that a good knowledge of counselling techniques and a love for people as well as an understanding of how to access services is just as useful as an in-depth knowledge of the Bible. Bible knowledge underpins the advice you give and the perspective you have but unless you’ve got the other things, then it’s not always that useful.
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
Having re-checked the Husband’s preaching module from his Baptist ministry course, the length of sermon they advise is 20 minutes, give or take a few minutes either side. On the grounds that it’s very difficult for even the most gifted of preachers to hold people’s attention for any longer. It seems odd that there’s such a fixation on 30 minutes sermons with sections of the CofE.
Some places expect 20, some 30 or 40. You're right that many people aren't good at holding attention for more than 20. But some are.
Yes - there are a wide range of skills expected of a church leader. The "standard" view in conservative evangelical places tend to take the Ephesians 4 model of having someone whose main job is some kind of Bible-centred preaching/teaching ministry, with the aim that they equip everyone else for "works of service". So the preaching and teaching is seen as enabling the people more gifted at pastoral care (or whatever) to use their gifts to build up the Body of Christ.
And yes - the preacher also needs a good knowledge and love of the congregation in order to get the application, pitching, etc right.
That's the theory, anyway.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
