|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: CofE alternative provision ...
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Thank you Manipled Mutineer, but I'm already convinced I don't want to be a part of any church. This thread was started partly in hope that someone might suggest something that made sense and suspecting I wouldn't be the only person thinking that this was it, time to go.
As I have said a few times, this is only one of several issues that have made me walk away. SSM and Women Bishops are some way down a list I made, but are final straws that make me feel that I cannot go back in conscience.
[ 20. November 2012, 21:59: Message edited by: Curiosity killed ... ]
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
If we didn't believe in all that religion and sacramental rubbish we'd be quite happy outside the church.
Religious belief isn't dependent upon any particular organised church.
Whether the validity of the sacraments rests upon special men, upon God, or upon both is a matter of theological interpretation.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
I heard of a Methodist minister who threatened to put up a banner outside her church 'Women welcomed at all levels in this church'. ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
Very tempted to tweet, facebook and banner - "We've been ordaining women since the 1920's"
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
Just a thought .... Why wasn't it put to the opinion of everyone who is on the electoral roll of CofE churches? Why is a pretty unrepresentative group of the so called laity making the decision?
It can't be beyond the realms of the CofE's organisational ability to get a ballot paper in the hands of everyone on the roll.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Louise
Shipmate
# 30
|
Posted
Hi Exclamation Mark,
That's being discussed on the Women Bishops thread in Dead Horses right now. Can people remember that's where the main discussion should go?
thanks!
Louise
Dead Horses Host.
--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.
Posts: 6918 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Local URC / Methodist minister is YECcie - not an option.
Really? Gosh! Well, he must be a very lonely man, because that's hardly a common theological position in either of those two denominations.
The Baptist Union's website says that women should be in leadership at all levels in their denomination:
http://www.baptist.org.uk/archives/286-women-in-leadership-.html
However, if the Methodists in your area are YECcies, then I fear that your local Baptists could well be hellfire and brimstone fundamentalists! The Baptists are usually the most theologically conservative of these three denominations - though it would be interesting to know how they compare in terms of female clergy.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
malik3000
Shipmate
# 11437
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed...
Local URC / Methodist minister is YECcie - not an option.
Oh, how awful. The thought of having anything to do with someone whose view of the origin of life is different from yours. What ghastly contagion!
Good luck in your search for a church where everybody thinks exactly like you.
(Funny, but I didn't think that was the point of the Church.)
I don't expect everyone in a church to think exactly like me. There are many points of view. But i don't include documentably false fiction as a legitimate point of view worth a serious debate.
(BTw there are Pentecostals who are not YECers)
--------------------
God = love.
Otherwise, things are not just black or white.
Posts: 3149 | From: North America | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
Maybe the wives of the Anglican hierarchy should withdraw from the marriage bed until their husbands have a change of heart and support the appointment of women as bishops. Sex is a very strong persuader.
[ 21. November 2012, 05:53: Message edited by: bib ]
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Basilica
Shipmate
# 16965
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
Maybe the wives of the Anglican hierarchy should withdraw from the marriage bed until their husbands have a change of heart and support the appointment of women as bishops. Sex is a very strong persuader.
The Lysistrata approach is always worth considering, but I don't think it will work here, alas. The opposition was (a) not generally from the hierarchy and (b) in no small part from women...
Posts: 403 | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
I'd like to see a gradual approach from now on in, where increasing numbers of women priests are made Archdeacons, Canons and Deans. And to do a quietly good and impressive job of it. Then they will be ideally placed in 5 years time for those extra 6 (or 60) votes.
I reckon women could blow it if they overreact or leave now.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Basilica
Shipmate
# 16965
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
Maybe the wives of the Anglican hierarchy should withdraw from the marriage bed until their husbands have a change of heart and support the appointment of women as bishops. Sex is a very strong persuader.
The Lysistrata approach is always worth considering, but I don't think it will work here, alas. The opposition was (a) not generally from the hierarchy and (b) in no small part from women...
Posts: 403 | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
I'd like to see a gradual approach from now on in, where increasing numbers of women priests are made Archdeacons, Canons and Deans. And to do a quietly good and impressive job of it. Then they will be ideally placed in 5 years time for those extra 6 (or 60) votes.
I reckon women could blow it if they overreact or leave now.
So - basically what they have already been doing for the past decade?
I'm sorry, but "business as usual" is NOT the required response here. There needs to be a long, loud and unmistakable protest made. This is not something to just shrug off as "another of life's little disappointments".
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ender's Shadow
Shipmate
# 2272
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
I'd like to see a gradual approach from now on in, where increasing numbers of women priests are made Archdeacons, Canons and Deans. And to do a quietly good and impressive job of it. Then they will be ideally placed in 5 years time for those extra 6 (or 60) votes.
I reckon women could blow it if they overreact or leave now.
It was the house of LAITY that declined to accept the inadequate mess of pottage being offered to give legitimacy to those who continue to reject women's ordination, despite it being proclaimed that it is a legitimate position. The laity have almost no contact with such hierarchs, means the move is probably irrelevant. However at worst the prejudiced appointment of more women to such ranks, rather than the including, as promised in 1992, the opponents, will be further convinced that they can't trust the institution's stated intentions. So, overall, probably not a good move...
--------------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
Please don't refer to me as 'Ender' - the whole point of Ender's Shadow is that he isn't Ender.
Posts: 5018 | From: Manchester, England | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
But as there are so few opponents, there will be plenty of places for them as well.
The more of the Laity who get used to seeing women around in our cathedrals and important Diocesan services, and see them doing a good job, the more they are likely to accept this is the future of the church (as happened with women priests).
Like a mighty tortoise moves the church of God - it would seem that 20 years was a little too much of a rush for the old beast. Maybe 25 years will give it enough time.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
@ Louise's post above
I'm pretty exercised over this issue personally and it's not surprising it gave rise to a rash of threads yesterday.
A considered review this morning suggests that although this Purg "what do we do now" thread is not primarily about the rights and wrongs of the decision, it is still, probably, a Dead Horse under the "any aspect" rule in DH guideline 1.
But I'm taking that view to the Host Board first before taking any action. Meanwhile, the discussion may continue here.
B62, Purg Host
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
QLib
Bad Example
# 43
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Haven't we got more important things to do? TOGETHER? Rather than being liberal or traditional?
Yes, but then the difficulty is that people have different ideas about what it means to do things together. And the answer to that is to just do what needs doing with whoever will do them with you, and let the ideas sort themselves out.
--------------------
Tradition is the handing down of the flame, not the worship of the ashes Gustav Mahler.
Posts: 8913 | From: Page 28 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ender's Shadow
Shipmate
# 2272
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
But as there are so few opponents, there will be plenty of places for them as well.
Well - given that it hasn't happened so far, it seems optimistic that it will start to happen now.
The CofE has largely demonstrated that it can't be trusted to obey the Act of Synod that was passed to protect the RIGHTS of those who were legitimately opposed to the OoW. Now you're proposing unlawfully discriminating against men to make a political point. Then you expect the opponents to trust a 'Code of Practice'. ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
--------------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
Please don't refer to me as 'Ender' - the whole point of Ender's Shadow is that he isn't Ender.
Posts: 5018 | From: Manchester, England | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
jrrt01
Shipmate
# 11264
|
Posted
Baptists vary greatly (though with a higher proportion con eve). The baptist church closest to me has a strong liberal tradition. The number of women in pastorate is growing.
Posts: 62 | From: Manchester | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ender's Shadow:
Well - given that it hasn't happened so far, it seems optimistic that it will start to happen now.
The CofE has largely demonstrated that it can't be trusted to obey the Act of Synod that was passed to protect the RIGHTS of those who were legitimately opposed to the OoW. Now you're proposing unlawfully discriminating against men to make a political point. Then you expect the opponents to trust a 'Code of Practice'.
Actually, I think your opinion sounds rather paranoid. But YMMV.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
If in the UK someone wants women Bishops that are better Episcopally ordained than the Anglicans then the obvious answer is the Moravians. However I suspect that they will be asking hard questions if a sudden increase in interest.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Like a mighty dinosaur
Lumbers the church of God
Brothers we are treading
Where no sane man has trod
We are not divided
Oh no honestly
One in truth and doctrine
Just see us at Drumcree
Onward Christian soldiers
Spoiling for a fight
With the Cross of Jesus
Kept well out of sight.
I'm too incandescent with anger about this and lots of other things at the moment to post in Purg. A Hell thread may emerge when I've marshalled my thoughts.
[ 21. November 2012, 08:33: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
@daronmedway - point taken, but what, in your view, constitutes proper apostolic ministry on the part of the CofE episcopate? Something that approximates to your own 'take' on it?
Yes, something like that. Would that be wrong?
Happy to discuss this with you on another thread, but I'm pretty sure I know how it would play out:
D - "I think this"
G - "I thought you'd say that because you're a charismatic evangelical and you haven't thought the issue through as much as me."
D - "Thanks. Bye."
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel
Hmmm ... EE ...
I'm not sure that's what Curiosity Killed is saying. I happen to know that she spent a good many years in a church where there was a diversity of views and many YEC-ies (although not in leadership).
I can understand why she wouldn't want to be in a church where the leader held such views.
'Fraid I can't.
I personally rather like the idea of being in a church where the leader believes that each member of his or her congregation has been created by God in His image. This feels like a pretty good basis for ministry, don't you think?
If by 'YEC' we mean someone who refuses to think critically, then that is a prejudice based on the assumption that the whole question of origins has been comprehensively proven with irrefutable evidence. It has not (and I have had enough debates in my time to know that even atheists admit that, apart from the few delusional types who throw around the word 'fact' with reckless and ignorant abandon). Anyway, can't say any more about that as it's a DH subject.
But anyway, I think it's a very sad day when the fundamental requirement for Christian ministry is regarded as adherence to the naturalistic theory of origins! Have we really sunk that far?
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
leftfieldlover
Shipmate
# 13467
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
I'd like to see a gradual approach from now on in, where increasing numbers of women priests are made Archdeacons, Canons and Deans. And to do a quietly good and impressive job of it. Then they will be ideally placed in 5 years time for those extra 6 (or 60) votes.
I reckon women could blow it if they overreact or leave now.
That was my thought last night. I'm still very dismayed though and am seriously considering looking elsewhere. But as someone else says, where?
--------------------
I can gauge your mood from your approach to food.
Posts: 164 | From: oxford | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jonah the Whale
Ship's pet cetacean
# 1244
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
I personally rather like the idea of being in a church where the leader believes that each member of his or her congregation has been created by God in His image. This feels like a pretty good basis for ministry, don't you think?
Do you really think that only by believing the earth is just a few thousand years old we can believe that people are made in God's image?
Posts: 2799 | From: Nether Regions | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
EtymologicalEvangelical - so I have to attend a church where things I strongly believe to be untrue and theologically incorrect are preached from the pulpit? And I'm being ridiculous to make decisions on theological belief? Wow, just wow!
<dead horses tangent>YECcie - Young Earth Creationist, believes God made the world in 6 days as per Genesis 1-2:1 account, 6,000 years ago and there is no such thing as evolution, also Noah's Ark existed.</dead horses tangent>
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
EtymologicalEvangelical - so I have to attend a church where things I strongly believe to be untrue and theologically incorrect are preached from the pulpit? And I'm being ridiculous to make decisions on theological belief? Wow, just wow!
<dead horses tangent>YECcie - Young Earth Creationist, believes God made the world in 6 days as per Genesis 1-2:1 account, 6,000 years ago and there is no such thing as evolution, also Noah's Ark existed.</dead horses tangent>
And not only that, but also being told how your theology is defective, how Christianity doesn't work properly if you don't "believe what the Bible says", how you're in bed with Satanically deceived and deceiving scientists and so forth? I've been in a university CU with a YEC leadership and it wasn't pretty.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
...so I have to attend a church where things I strongly believe to be untrue and theologically incorrect are preached from the pulpit? And I'm being ridiculous to make decisions on theological belief? Wow, just wow!
Interesting. There are conservative members of the church who think in exactly the same way concerning exactly the same issues.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
The issue of limits to tolerance - and how you behave if you stay "within" - is a good one, somewhat tangential to this thread, and maybe it deserves a thread in its own right which could I suspect steer clear from the DH much more easily. Worth thinking about that one, Shipmates.
B62, Purg Host
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
@EE - Curiosity is saying that she couldn't be in a church like that, not that other people shouldn't.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
She is not saying that the YEC-ie minister shouldn't be a minister - just that she doesn't want to be under their ministry if he/she is a YEC-ie.
Neither would I.
Or at least, if I were then life would be pretty difficult for both of us ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Actually, I'm far happier out of church entirely. That way I do not have to deal with those who...don't agree with me cause they're stupid
Fixed that for you.
Others have argued that since the Church hasn't voted the 'Right' way, you should leave, stop giving financially, break away your affiliation, etc. Is Church a club where you need to agree with everything, and everyone, or you don't want any part of it - or is it a hodgepodge community of diverse, sometimes diametrically different people, all trying to get on with each other in the peace and love of Christ?
I strongly believe in women's ministry, and think that preventing women from holding a posisiton in the church because of their gender is terrible. But I belong to a free church congregation which doesn't even allow women elders, let alone anything higher. I considered a few years ago whether I should leave this church that had been so welcoming to me, that was full of my friends, and brothers and sisters in Christ. I decided it would be petty, and destructive to do so, cutting off my nose to spite my face.
For me, I decided the community is more important than the politics. When there is an opportunity to do so, I will argue the case for women's ministry within my church and attempt to change it's decision on this issue. When there is no opportunity, I will still support the church as best as I can, with my time, money, prayers, and fellowship.
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
@daronmedway.
You asked a reasonable question. Would it be wrong to expect bishops to exercise an apostolic ministry in the way that you understand it. Well, no, of course not. That's fair enough. Provided you also realised that there might be things they expected from you that might not exactly 'fit' what you think.
I suspect you'll have encountered that already and either come to terms with it or turned a blind-eye - depending on what the issue is. And that would be the same, of course, for Anglo-Catholics, MoR clergy, conservative evangelicals or charismatic ones ... and other stripes and shades of opinion besides.
So, fair enough.
As for the following:
D - "I think this"
G - "I thought you'd say that because you're a charismatic evangelical and you haven't thought the issue through as much as me."
D - "Thanks. Bye."
Well, yes, I am delighted to see the level of self-awareness you are displaying in your posts ...
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Seriously, we could have a new thread on that but we'd probably end up in a scrap. Inevitably, I would have thought.
The further I get away from charismatic evangelicalism the more manipulative it looks - although there are shades between outright manipulation and bullying and subtle persuasion.
It's very hard for me to remain objective about that and whilst I fully accept that there are 'thinking' charismatics about - and you would clearly be among them - there's something about it that means that I can't go back to it - however modified a form it takes.
Arguably, though, I am channelling my own 'charismatic' propensities into an increasingly sacramental/mystical approach (mystical in the traditional, Christian sense not a woolly, airy-fairy whishty-whishty way). I don't think I've lost any sense of the immanence of God - which I still consider to be the charismatic scene's best feature.
I'm sure we could end up with an objective and sensible discussion, but perhaps I ought to let a bit more water pass under the bridge. I've been undergoing a fairly painful transition from full-on charismatic certainties to whatever it is I'm morphing into ... it's still work in progress.
I will agree that there is a temptation to diss or poke the tongue out at people who are at a different stage - as it were - if I can say that without implying that I'm at a more 'developed' stage than you are. That's not what I mean at all.
But just as a YEC approach would be accompanied by certain unpalatable features, so, to my mind, would a full-on charismatic approach. As indeed would some forms of sacramental approach too ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ender's Shadow
Shipmate
# 2272
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
quote:
Originally posted by Ender's Shadow:
Well - given that it hasn't happened so far, it seems optimistic that it will start to happen now.
The CofE has largely demonstrated that it can't be trusted to obey the Act of Synod that was passed to protect the RIGHTS of those who were legitimately opposed to the OoW. Now you're proposing unlawfully discriminating against men to make a political point. Then you expect the opponents to trust a 'Code of Practice'.
Actually, I think your opinion sounds rather paranoid. But YMMV.
Paranoia suggests that there is no evidence for what I'm arguing. However given that almost no opponents of OoW have risen in the hierarchy since 1992, certainly not a number consistent with the numbers that they've demonstrated in votes, and the CofE itself has admitted to its failure to consecrate more than ONE conservative Evangelicals in recent years, I feel it's you that not engaging with the real world.
And I stand by my point about ILLEGALLY appointing women in preference to men. That's really going to encourage a belief that the CofE can be expected to do what it's supposed to do.
We're in a horrible hole. This has been largely caused by the decision to force through the legislation in 1992 by giving too many hostages to fortune. AFAICS the only moral thing to do is to declare that they made a horrible mistake in 1992 by making those promises, and FULLY COMPENSATE all those who were stupid enough to trust those promises. That means that opponent clergy would need to be offered a full stipend and housing for the rest of their lives, as they are the ones mainly in the firing line as far as loss for this is concerned. It can be argued that laity who contributed to capital costs of projects in the church from which they are now being expelled might also have grounds for demanding a refund... Or we can do the 'Third Province' approach, which to me is a far more satisfactory solution all round. Or we can admit that we are a totally dishonourable church, whose promises are worthless, in which case nobody in their right minds should believe us when we talk about spiritual things.
--------------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
Please don't refer to me as 'Ender' - the whole point of Ender's Shadow is that he isn't Ender.
Posts: 5018 | From: Manchester, England | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Hawk - I can appreciate what you're saying. I think many of us have found ourselves in analogous situations.
In your case, though, as in a similar situation my wife and I found ourselves in some years ago, there are militating factors - friendships and so on - that obviate or alleviate your sense of frustration.
Might it not be in Curiosity's case that those factors do not apply? None of us can read her mind, still less come out with value judgements on whether her decision is the right or wrong one. We are not in her shoes.
For all any of us know, she might not have the level of friendships you describe in her church and this wouldn't provide the anchor it does in your case.
In my own case, my wife and I stuck it out in a very unconducive church situation for years and years because we had loads of friends there and because we'd been blinkered to a certain extent that its way was THE way to do things. When we finally left it was truly gutting and painful.
However, we soon found that the sky didn't fall in and that plenty of other churches had other ways of doing things.
There can be something very claustrophobic about churches with a particular agenda or emphasis - and that applies right across the board, not just to charismatic evangelical or conservative evangelical independent fellowships.
There's got to be some wiggle-room somewhere.
It's easy to pick up on comments such as those Curiosity has made in order to imply that she wants everything just as she wants it ... 'She thinks she's ever so superior to that YEC chap ...'
Or, in daronmedway's case, 'Gamaliel thinks he's ever so superior and has thought these things through more than I have ...'
It is genuinely difficult to articulate these things without sounding like 'I'm at Stage 4 or 5 on Fowler, you're only at Stage 2 or 3 so you can take a running jump ...'
But that's not what I'm trying to say - nor, I submit, is it what Curiosity would be trying to say.
Speaking personally, I'd love to see Curiosity settled somewhere - the Quakers perhaps? But I'm not Curiosity Killed and it ain't my place to say what is or isn't right for her.
By the same token, it would be wrong of me to suggest that you look elsewhere for fellowship or suggest that daronmedway tones down his charismaticness a bit ... on second thoughts ... ![[Biased]](wink.gif) ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
posted by Enders:
quote:
It can be argued that laity who contributed to capital costs of projects in the church from which they are now being expelled might also have grounds for demanding a refund...
This is utter nonsense. People give to the church on a charitable and voluntary basis for the ministry of the church. If you go down this route you would have to give a refund every time members of your pcc vote on something and someone doesn't like the way the vote went. The church changes, and anyone who thinks that it can be a monolith standing for all time, ever the same is frankly deluded and has little understanding of what the church is. There will always be things that people disagree on and there ill always be a group of people who have to swallow the bitter pill - it's just the way it is. This particular pill is cruelly bitter, not only for the sheer time and energy put into the whole thing, but also because of the botched 1992 affair and the fact that the vote has highlighted a fatal flaw in the mechanism of the synod.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
@Hawk, Barnabas62 and I are discussing whether to start another thread on what makes people move on.
I want to reiterate, there are a number of reasons I've gone already, initially for a break to recover from burn out from doing to much and to give others the space to take over or become used to it not being done. What I wondering now is whether I should return at all, not when. This isn't the only issue that has pushed me out, it's another reason that's making me think I cannot return.
I am not saying I have to agree with everything and I think being challenged is good. I do however think that deep theological differences can be a breaking point.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
...so I have to attend a church where things I strongly believe to be untrue and theologically incorrect are preached from the pulpit? And I'm being ridiculous to make decisions on theological belief? Wow, just wow!
Interesting. There are conservative members of the church who think in exactly the same way concerning exactly the same issues.
Indeed. And they go off and find churches that agree with them. Point?
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Sorry CK, I didn't mean to sidetrack the thread. I guess that even sleeping on it the emotiveness of the issue is still there.
In response to your question there are a number of things to consider, acknowledging too that a break can be good to get your head around things and to recover; although a long break can make it difficult to return.
I think that if the issues that are driving you away are no longer open to change and discussion then maybe it is time to walk away from it and shake the dust from your feet. On the other hand, if it is something that is important to you and there is still the possibility of further discussion and the possibility of change then it's worth hanging on - even when it means hanging on in a community that is difficult and messy. Too many good people walk away in frustration, leaving a community of which they were a vital and important part. It's bad for the person who walks away, but it's also bad for the community they leave. In so many cases I have seen people leave without ever realising who they inspire and support and encourage, and it's deeply sad.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Actually, I'm far happier out of church entirely. That way I do not have to deal with those who...don't agree with me cause they're stupid
Fixed that for you.
Don't do that kind of fixing again, even as a pointed joke. Its generally reckoned to be a bit of a C3 linecross to muck about with Shipmates' quotes to make a point. And in this case it's clearly a personal dig anyway, not a comment on a post. Take it to Hell if you want, but leave it out here.
Here's the original quote, to save Shipmates looking it up.
quote:
Actually, I'm far happier out of church entirely. That way I do not have to deal with those who are not prepared to engage with ideas not covered by the Bible or remove my God given brains at the door.
Barnabas62
Purgatory Host
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
SusanDoris
Incurable Optimist
# 12618
|
Posted
Curiosity Killed
quote:
I'm pretty sure this was from one of your posts: So, what alternatives are there currently available if the CofE is not an option?
Reading through this thread with much interest as always, I'm waving arms in the air to attract attention!! ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
My suggestion is that you could perhaps drop in on a Humanist Group meeting somewhere. If they're anything like the group I belong to, they would not in any way try to criticise your faith, especially as many have been in the CofE themselves. I think you would find them with a lively, positive, and understanding alternative viewpoint.
--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr Clingford
Shipmate
# 7961
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
...Speaking personally, I'd love to see Curiosity settled somewhere - the Quakers perhaps? But I'm not Curiosity Killed and it ain't my place to say what is or isn't right for her.
I was going to suggest the Quakers too.
A quakery anglican or anglicany quaker.
--------------------
Ne'er cast a clout till May be out.
If only.
Posts: 1660 | From: A Fleeting moment | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
This thread was asking if there was anywhere to go instead, or I was going to become part of the 90% unchurched in the UK.
Curiosity Killed, please don't. Your contention is with the House of Laity not with Jesus Christ. Walking out on him because you are disgusted with some of his servants is spiritually very dangerous indeed.
Please console your self with the following, platitudinous though they might seem in the wrath of the moment.
1. Nothing is actually different from where it was yesterday morning. It's just that a change you earnestly desired hasn't happened.
2. Neither Synod, not the House of Laity are the church.
3. The House of Laity had less representative credibility than the pre-1832 House of Commons before. Alas, that also has not changed. Nor, unless its electoral system is reconstructed will any future House of Laity have any credibility either.
4. If some of the proponents of women bishops had not said they would vote against the previous version of the resolution with the original version of the bishops' amendment in it, and behaved like De Valera and the Treaty, that version might have got through.
5. If Christ has called you, he has called you to serve him inside his church, not outside it.
6. If eventually you feel that you must join another ecclesial community, don't make the move until you find the one you feel you are actually being called to go to.
7. There is wisdom in what Leo and Hawk have said.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
quote:
from Enders Shadow And I stand by my point about ILLEGALLY appointing women in preference to men. That's really going to encourage a belief that the CofE can be expected to do what it's supposed to do. We're in a horrible hole. This has been largely caused by the decision to force through the legislation in 1992 by giving too many hostages to fortune. AFAICS the only moral thing to do is to declare that they made a horrible mistake in 1992 by making those promises, and FULLY COMPENSATE all those who were stupid enough to trust those promises. That means that opponent clergy would need to be offered a full stipend and housing for the rest of their lives, as they are the ones mainly in the firing line as far as loss for this is concerned. It can be argued that laity who contributed to capital costs of projects in the church from which they are now being expelled might also have grounds for demanding a refund... Or we can do the 'Third Province' approach, which to me is a far more satisfactory solution all round. Or we can admit that we are a totally dishonourable church, whose promises are worthless, in which case nobody in their right minds should believe us when we talk about spiritual things.
Gosh, that's told us!
I'm sorry to tell you that this sounds remarkably like the arguments one hears from vengeful soon-to-be-ex wives in the divorce courts... and do the rest of us really WANT someone who's likely to argue about who bought the toaster?
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I rather suspect, Enoch, that CK's current disillusionment is rather wider than the immediate issue of yesterday's vote and has been brewing for rather a lot longer ...
What she's said is that this might be the final straw - it is one of many, just the latest in a long litany of issues.
We can all make suggestions - I've made one myself - but ultimately it's up to CK. It ain't for any of us to say that she 'should' do this or 'ought' to do that or to marshal the usual Bible verses and what-not to suggest that she sticks with it regardless of how she feels.
Of course, as people of faith and people who belong or are involved with particular faith-groups and expressions of that faith we are bound to come out with recommendations and suggestions - and indeed CK has invited us to do so.
But ultimately whether she stays, goes, abandons faith entirely or converts to Scientology or the worship of the Green Fuzzy-Felt Monster from The Planet Zog is up to her.
I know that's obvious but I just thought it was worth saying. Ignore me if you disagree.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675
|
Posted
The focus of my concern (following my real frustration and sadness of yesterday's news) is the synodical process. That seems to be the area in need of dire reform. The current system has left us with a decision the upsets and/or displeased the majority of the church. I suspect that a look at how the make-up of the house laity may have changed (or perhaps was even engineered) in the past few years, might help shed some light on this dark time.
I think we'll pull through...
K.
--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
SusanDoris
Incurable Optimist
# 12618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Curiosity Killed, please don't. Your contention is with the House of Laity not with Jesus Christ. Walking out on him because you are disgusted with some of his servants is spiritually very dangerous indeed.
When I stopped believing a long time ago I found it gave me a complete wholeness in terms of spirituality, so I wonder how you feel it is a 'dangerous' move. And that's a genuinely interested question, which I ask because I don't know the answer.
--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
This thread was asking if there was anywhere to go instead, or I was going to become part of the 90% unchurched in the UK.
Curiosity Killed, please don't. Your contention is with the House of Laity not with Jesus Christ. Walking out on him because you are disgusted with some of his servants is spiritually very dangerous indeed.
Not that CK was suggesting doing any such thing.
quote:
Please console your self with the following, platitudinous though they might seem in the wrath of the moment.
1. Nothing is actually different from where it was yesterday morning. It's just that a change you earnestly desired hasn't happened.
No. Something has changed. The church has effectively said "No, women can't be bishops". It's positively announced its sexism to the world, rather than not having yet said otherwise.
quote:
5. If Christ has called you, he has called you to serve him inside his church, not outside it.
This rather presupposes a higher level of identity between the organised church and the actual Body of Christ than I, for one, feel inclined to accept.
quote:
6. If eventually you feel that you must join another ecclesial community, don't make the move until you find the one you feel you are actually being called to go to.
Sometimes nowhere is better than a bad somewhere that we haven't found a somewhere else to.
quote:
7. There is wisdom in what Leo and Hawk have said.
Yeah, but it doesn't always apply. I don't, for example, know what I'd be doing at the moment if my local gaff was the only show in town; it was certainly making the baptismal promises I made at my kids' baptisms to encourage them in public worship and ultimately bring themselves to confirmation extremely difficult as every service took them further away from that point.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ender's Shadow
Shipmate
# 2272
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
The focus of my concern (following my real frustration and sadness of yesterday's news) is the synodical process. That seems to be the area in need of dire reform. The current system has left us with a decision the upsets and/or displeased the majority of the church. I suspect that a look at how the make-up of the house laity may have changed (or perhaps was even engineered) in the past few years, might help shed some light on this dark time.
I think we'll pull through...
K.
Hmm - while it's always attractive to shoot the messenger, are you really sure that the vote isn't an accurate reflection of the view of the people in the pews? That something like 37% of the people in the pews are of opposed to women bishops seems possible... Given the average age of a CofE member is way above that of the population, I think it may well be accurate. BUT WE DON'T KNOW. And to assume that it's just a few diehard conservatives who've blocked this against the will of 90+% is dangerous.
And if it was an accurate reflection of the views in the pews, then what? Would you accept that - or tell them that they are suffering from a 'false consciousness' and force it through regardless?
--------------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
Please don't refer to me as 'Ender' - the whole point of Ender's Shadow is that he isn't Ender.
Posts: 5018 | From: Manchester, England | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ender's Shadow:
quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
The focus of my concern (following my real frustration and sadness of yesterday's news) is the synodical process. That seems to be the area in need of dire reform. The current system has left us with a decision the upsets and/or displeased the majority of the church. I suspect that a look at how the make-up of the house laity may have changed (or perhaps was even engineered) in the past few years, might help shed some light on this dark time.
I think we'll pull through...
K.
Hmm - while it's always attractive to shoot the messenger, are you really sure that the vote isn't an accurate reflection of the view of the people in the pews? That something like 37% of the people in the pews are of opposed to women bishops seems possible... Given the average age of a CofE member is way above that of the population, I think it may well be accurate. BUT WE DON'T KNOW. And to assume that it's just a few diehard conservatives who've blocked this against the will of 90+% is dangerous.
And if it was an accurate reflection of the views in the pews, then what? Would you accept that - or tell them that they are suffering from a 'false consciousness' and force it through regardless?
I don't know.
K.
--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
If in the UK someone wants women Bishops that are better Episcopally ordained than the Anglicans then the obvious answer is the Moravians. However I suspect that they will be asking hard questions if a sudden increase in interest.
Jengie
There you go. The Moravians are a group that deserve to grow. Nobody does Christmas as well as the Moravians.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
