homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Purgatory: The new Archbishop (Page 3)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: The new Archbishop
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
There are more former RC clergy in the CofE than is widely recognised. Marriage is usually a key reason, but it isn't just 'I want to get married and remain a priest'.

Many good Catholics will be very shocked by this. Realising one is not cut out for celibacy and that the connection between priestly calling and this particular burden doesn't seem to be obvious any more, seems to set people off on a faith journey that takes them in a direction they might not have expected when they were 16.

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Mark Betts

Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Betts   Email Mark Betts   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I've opened up another thread in HELL, for the benefit of Zack82 and anyone else who's interested in our disagreement on here.

--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."

Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Mark Betts

Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Betts   Email Mark Betts   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Anyway, enough of that crap. Here's something for all you guardianistas to get your teeth into:

Archbishop Justin Welby warns against trusting fallible leaders

--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."

Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
The trouble for the RCC is that by liberalising on these issues they'd probably drive away more people than they'd attract, especially in today's increasingly post-Christian environment.

I find this a slightly odd point of view. The RCC holds the views it does because they understand that to be the will of God (as, I hope, do the other churches.) Asking the question "if we change our theology in this way, how many more bums would we get on seats" is, well, strange.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116

 - Posted      Profile for Mudfrog   Email Mudfrog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Maybe it would be time to ask certain wider questions: do some of those things 'we' have held sacred and seen as the will of God need scrutising and testing to see if they are actually the will of God?

Certain things found in Scripture are indeed to be 'ringfenced, as it were, but other things - celibacy of all priests, for example - cannot be supported from scrioture, and even Tradition says that celibacy has not always been the case.

If therefore celibacy were to be discarded it would be less a matter of theology and more a matter of changing an ecclesiastical practice.

The authorities would need to ask, what would happen to the Gospel if priests were able to marry? Would there be a provable, inevitable negative effect? If not, then just change the policy!

--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
sebby
Shipmate
# 15147

 - Posted      Profile for sebby   Email sebby   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I wonder if it connected to theology at all, as it were, in the slightest?

An argument for celibacy might be availabilty . A single person (male or female) can be on call pretty much all the time and theoretically only requires a bedroom and a study.

This does not only apply to the clergy. I was once told, being single at the time, 'ah good, we will all see so much more of you'. Perhaps it is a argument for doctors, soldiers etc.

--------------------
sebhyatt

Posts: 1340 | From: yorks | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Edward Green
Review Editor
# 46

 - Posted      Profile for Edward Green   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Trying to eke out some ++Welby conclusions from the thread. It is clear the CofE is changing. The story that it is run by liberals has collapsed. Some who wish to believe that are in denial about it however.

The moving force in the CofE is creedal & missional. There seems to be an emphasis on shared practice before theological tradition.

This is difficult for a number of groups and individuals who have a strong unique identity, and for those who have security in traditions following a particular pattern of behaviour. It may be the Evangelical who finds themselves threatened by the more Catholic new growing congregation, or the Catholic who finds themselves threatened by the more Evangelical congregation exploring catholic spirituality.

There is also an amazing new generation of female Evangelical clergy. After the last 'Bishops' vote at Synod a number of Evangelical groups finally nailed colours to the mast.

There is also a slow swing in SCP/AffCath circles away from 'liberals dressing up' towards a more missional catholic position.

I would suggest that ++Justin represents this rather well.

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

Posts: 4893 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159

 - Posted      Profile for Angloid     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
Anyway, enough of that crap. Here's something for all you guardianistas to get your teeth into:

Archbishop Justin Welby warns against trusting fallible leaders

As a guardianista, can I ask what you are getting at? Do you expect us to disagree?

--------------------
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
Mark Betts

Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Betts   Email Mark Betts   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Edward Green:
Trying to eke out some ++Welby conclusions from the thread. It is clear the CofE is changing. The story that it is run by liberals has collapsed. Some who wish to believe that are in denial about it however.

How do you justify that? I wouldn't say I want to believe it, but IMO it seems to be an inescapable conclusion these days. I was hoping that a new archbishop springing out of HTB might change things, but I've yet to be convinced.

quote:
The moving force in the CofE is creedal & missional. There seems to be an emphasis on shared practice before theological tradition.

Yes, but what sort of mission? Indeed, what is the C of E's mission these days?

quote:
This is difficult for a number of groups and individuals who have a strong unique identity, and for those who have security in traditions following a particular pattern of behaviour. It may be the Evangelical who finds themselves threatened by the more Catholic new growing congregation, or the Catholic who finds themselves threatened by the more Evangelical congregation exploring catholic spirituality.

There is also an amazing new generation of female Evangelical clergy. After the last 'Bishops' vote at Synod a number of Evangelical groups finally nailed colours to the mast.

There is also a slow swing in SCP/AffCath circles away from 'liberals dressing up' towards a more missional catholic position.


So SCP/AffCath are becoming more conservative? Or should I say orthodox? Tell me more...

quote:
I would suggest that ++Justin represents this rather well.
Certainly, there is the odd statement in some of his sermons and interviews which sound surprisingly orthodox and positive, but then almost straight away he says something else which is anything but. Like I said at the beginning of the thread, I'm in two minds about Justin and probably always wil be.

--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."

Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Mark Betts

Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Betts   Email Mark Betts   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
Anyway, enough of that crap. Here's something for all you guardianistas to get your teeth into:

Archbishop Justin Welby warns against trusting fallible leaders

As a guardianista, can I ask what you are getting at? Do you expect us to disagree?
My dear Angloid, stop being so paranoid - I'm not "getting at" anything, just trying to kick-start some discussion.

--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."

Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159

 - Posted      Profile for Angloid     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
OK, point taken. But why then the reference (which is usually intended as a sneer) to 'guardianistas' when you could just say 'you' ?

--------------------
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
Mark Betts

Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Betts   Email Mark Betts   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
OK, point taken. But why then the reference (which is usually intended as a sneer) to 'guardianistas' when you could just say 'you' ?

Most of the people on here are of that persuasion aren't they? However, it wasn't intended to be a sneer, simply a reference to the fact that the article was from the Guardian newspaper.

--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."

Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Mark Betts

Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Betts   Email Mark Betts   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
NB. Having said that, I have just looked at the guidelines for Purgatory, and I realise my reference to "guardianistas" wasn't helpful to the discussion, so I apologise on this occasion.

--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."

Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
OK, point taken. But why then the reference (which is usually intended as a sneer) to 'guardianistas' when you could just say 'you' ?

Most of the people on here are of that persuasion aren't they? However, it wasn't intended to be a sneer, simply a reference to the fact that the article was from the Guardian newspaper.
What persuasion would that be? Personally I find the Guardian a bit right wing and money-obsessed, and well as a bit overly secularist.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Mark Betts

Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Betts   Email Mark Betts   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
What persuasion would that be? Personally I find the Guardian a bit right wing and money-obsessed, and well as a bit overly secularist.

I suppose it's the persuasion non-readers of The Guardian imagine it's readers to be, but fair point it may not necessarily be the case. "Socialist-Workeristas?" ...maybe not. [Devil]

--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."

Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Holy Smoke
Shipmate
# 14866

 - Posted      Profile for Holy Smoke     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Edward Green:
Trying to eke out some ++Welby conclusions from the thread. It is clear the CofE is changing. The story that it is run by liberals has collapsed. Some who wish to believe that are in denial about it however.

The moving force in the CofE is creedal & missional. There seems to be an emphasis on shared practice before theological tradition...

It would seem that the old 'Broad Church' liberalism is on the way out now. It would useful for those members of the generation brought up as Christians who had problems with the literal meaning of the creeds, but who didn't wish to, or indeed weren't able to give up on the church entirely, for whatever reason. These days it is much easier for someone to explore other expressions of spirituality (or none at all), and there really is no reason for them to sign up to something they really don't believe in, and which makes increasingly few concessions to people who wish to take a more theologically-liberal approach.

Where does that leave the CofE? (Or the RCC, for that matter, at least in more 'developed' countries) If I were to be blunt, then I would see it increasingly putting forward propositions which fewer and fewer people accept as true, therefore fewer and fewer people will attend church or support the church in other ways. I really don't see much future, beyond the next 10-15 years - there will be an even bigger collapse in numbers, as more and more people look for alternatives outside traditional religion.

Posts: 335 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2009  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
but other things - celibacy of all priests, for example - cannot be supported from scrioture, and even Tradition says that celibacy has not always been the case.

Yes, celibacy is more policy than theology. Sorry - I was referring more to the RC position on divorce and remarriage. I wasn't clear.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Smoke:
and which makes increasingly few concessions to people who wish to take a more theologically-liberal approach.

There are two kinds of "theologically-liberal", I think. One kind is rooted in scripture and in Jesus Christ, and comes to a liberal theological position after some serious study of what we know about Jesus.

The second kind wants to believe in something bigger than them, but wants comfortable truthiness rather than truth - it only wants to be "Christian" if it isn't inconvenient.

Is not the role of teaching to move people from the second category to the first?

Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Mark Betts

Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Betts   Email Mark Betts   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
There are two kinds of "theologically-liberal", I think. One kind is rooted in scripture and in Jesus Christ, and comes to a liberal theological position after some serious study of what we know about Jesus.

The second kind wants to believe in something bigger than them, but wants comfortable truthiness rather than truth - it only wants to be "Christian" if it isn't inconvenient.

Is not the role of teaching to move people from the second category to the first?

Your second category isn't liberalism at all IMO - it is what is known as "cafeteria christianity" - where you pick and choose what you like and what you don't like.

The first type isn't really rooted in scripture and Jesus Christ - it is more rooted in reason, which trumps every other type of Revelation. After you have decided what is so and what is not so, you then open your Bible and apply the bits which make sense to you, but always remembering that human intellect and reason have to take priority.

Can the second type be "educated" into the first? I don't know, but if so, what is that worth to anyone? I would think it all depends on whether the end result is a slightly liberal theology or an extremely liberal theology.

One thing I have thought about; it could be that someone with a cafeteria-style theology might have a bigger view of God than someone with a liberal theology, which, when taken to extremes, can be little more than humanism.

--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."

Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159

 - Posted      Profile for Angloid     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think that what some people mistakenly see as 'liberal' is a theological approach which is uneasy with tight definitions and is willing to acknowledge the mystery. As Holy Smoke says, the old liberalism of the 19th and early 20th century rationalists has long been outmoded. Most of the 'radicals' in the 1960s and their successors in AffCath came from a catholic-liturgical-sacramental tradition.

--------------------
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
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Smoke:
and which makes increasingly few concessions to people who wish to take a more theologically-liberal approach.

There are two kinds of "theologically-liberal", I think. One kind is rooted in scripture and in Jesus Christ, and comes to a liberal theological position after some serious study of what we know about Jesus.

The second kind wants to believe in something bigger than them, but wants comfortable truthiness rather than truth - it only wants to be "Christian" if it isn't inconvenient.

Is not the role of teaching to move people from the second category to the first?

These are important but subtle differences. The problem is that religious 'communicators' find it very difficult to preach from a theologically liberal position without simply undermining (or being in fear of undermining) the faith of their religious listeners (or confirming non-believers in their lack of faith).

I've come across clergy and theologians who feel that expressing their liberal positions in a congregational environment is likely to damage laypeople's faith; haven't we all come across or read about clergy who find themselves in this position? One theologian I know who trains ordinands said that most ministers would just do it badly. This is a pretty dire situation for liberal theology, because it means that it will never be able to speak of itself clearly and openly. It seeps out in attitudes and silences, half-understood and vaguely suspected. This surely leaves the floor wide open for a more assertive evangelical takeover in church culture, which means that people of another persuasion will be left dissatisfied and unfed.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
moonlitdoor
Shipmate
# 11707

 - Posted      Profile for moonlitdoor   Email moonlitdoor   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
One of the things that impresses me about the new pope is that he has managed to get himself quoted talking about God. The British media seem to regard Anglican bishops as spokespeople for a think tank and always quote them when they speak about social policy but rarely when they speak about God or Jesus Christ.

I hope Justin Welby can change this a bit, and that he speaks about God whenever he can, and about social policy only when he feels he must.

--------------------
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
Holy Smoke
Shipmate
# 14866

 - Posted      Profile for Holy Smoke     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
There are two kinds of "theologically-liberal", I think...

I'm thinking of someone like John Macquarrie as an examplar of Type 1 liberalism - a dying breed, I fear. Your 'Type 2' - the 'fluffy' Christian [Biased] , it would be nice to direct towards a 'Type 1' liberalism, but as I said, there doesn't seem to be all that much on offer these days, and what there is, is really just catering to an older generation. The future, as I see it, is theologically orthodox and conservative. What's the point in directing someone to something that won't be there in 10 years time?

[ 01. April 2013, 16:23: Message edited by: Holy Smoke ]

Posts: 335 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2009  |  IP: Logged
Mark Betts

Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Betts   Email Mark Betts   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
...This is a pretty dire situation for liberal theology, because it means that it will never be able to speak of itself clearly and openly. It seeps out in attitudes and silences, half-understood and vaguely suspected. This surely leaves the floor wide open for a more assertive evangelical takeover in church culture...

...and so enters Justin Welby, as the AB of C with his charismatic-style HTB theology! [Yipee] As FiF-style Anglo-Catholicism has (just about) had its day in the C of E, I'm coming to the conclusion that maybe this is the only christian tradition left which is in any sense authentic for the english church.

--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."

Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
"cafeteria christianity" - where you pick and choose what you like and what you don't like.

I think everyone does that, whether they acknowledge it or not.

The reason i claim to be orthodox is that, over my life, i sign up to everything on the menu but at any one time some 'dishes' suit my stage of life more than others.

Doctrines like the immaculate conception meant nothing to me until i was in my mid-fifties when it made perfect sense to me.

There are doctrines which don't mean much, if anything, to me now but which i don't deny because i believe there may come a time when they
will speak to my condition.

This is one of the reasons why I believe that 'liberals' should not preach about what they do NOT believe. There isd plenty which can be affirmed with integrity.

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
Your second category isn't liberalism at all IMO - it is what is known as "cafeteria christianity" - where you pick and choose what you like and what you don't like.

Yes, quite. But have you ever met such a person who described himself as a "cafeteria Christian"?
I suspect not. In my experience, most people with that set of opinions think of themselves as liberal Christians, and would so identify if asked.

quote:

The first type isn't really rooted in scripture and Jesus Christ - it is more rooted in reason, which trumps every other type of Revelation. After you have decided what is so and what is not so, you then open your Bible and apply the bits which make sense to you, but always remembering that human intellect and reason have to take priority.

And this is a serious misrepresentation, but it's just your Orthodox knee jerking, so I'll ignore it.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159

 - Posted      Profile for Angloid     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:

I hope Justin Welby can change this a bit, and that he speaks about God whenever he can, and about social policy only when he feels he must.

A real prophet (and one would hope that an ABC would not be a false one) would surely speak about God and social justice in the same breath.

--------------------
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
Mark Betts

Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Betts   Email Mark Betts   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
The first type isn't really rooted in scripture and Jesus Christ - it is more rooted in reason, which trumps every other type of Revelation. After you have decided what is so and what is not so, you then open your Bible and apply the bits which make sense to you, but always remembering that human intellect and reason have to take priority.

And this is a serious misrepresentation, but it's just your Orthodox knee jerking, so I'll ignore it.
Perhaps it is - or maybe former FiF Anglo-Catholic knee-jerking - but it won't hurt to explain how I have misrepresented the position, or how it might be an over-reaction on my part.

--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."

Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
...This is a pretty dire situation for liberal theology, because it means that it will never be able to speak of itself clearly and openly. It seeps out in attitudes and silences, half-understood and vaguely suspected. This surely leaves the floor wide open for a more assertive evangelical takeover in church culture...

...and so enters Justin Welby, as the AB of C with his charismatic-style HTB theology! [Yipee] As FiF-style Anglo-Catholicism has (just about) had its day in the C of E, I'm coming to the conclusion that maybe this is the only christian tradition left which is in any sense authentic for the english church.
Well, we've already learnt from this thread that Justin Welby leans in a fairly Catholic direction, so it's probably not right to characterise him entirely as 'charismatic'. One blog describes him as a 'post-churchmanship Anglican'. And apparently, HTB currently ministers to an Anglo-Catholic congregation, among others. So things aren't as clear-cut as they might seem.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100208411/the-new-archbishop-of-canterbury-enthroned-today-must-wish-the-gay -issue-would-go-away-but-it-wont/

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Cafeteria Christianity has connotations of picking and choosing to suit oneself. It might, with a particularly uncharitable point of view, account for women who want to be priests or bishops and gay people who want to have sex. It doesn't account for straight men who think that women can be and are called to the priesthood and the episcopate or that there are gay relationships that are of the same value to God as straight ones. Those arise from a different understanding of what God intends and expects, and a different understanding of the nature of God's laws. If you believe that God's laws are fundamentally arbitrary and inexplicable, with no purpose other than to separate the sheep from the goats, then believing that women can't be priests and gay people have to be celibate makes sense. If you don't find that view to be compatible with scripture, tradition and reason then it does not.

Some of us arrive at a position of liberalism BECAUSE of what we read in the Gospels, not in spite of it. It's just that we resolve the dichotomy between the spirit of Jesus' teaching and the strict letter of Paul in favour of Jesus, as Jesus made it pretty clear that the spirit was far more important than the letter.

Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Jengie jon

Semper Reformanda
# 273

 - Posted      Profile for Jengie jon   Author's homepage   Email Jengie jon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Please, Please, Please "Catholic" and "Charismatic" are not mutually exclusive terms. For starters you have to make sense of this website if they were and this one.

Actually there is quite a strong symbiosis with a number of Evangelical Charismatics developing strong Catholic tendencies as they mature as Christians quite often without denigrating their charismatic roots.

Jengie

[ 01. April 2013, 17:00: Message edited by: Jengie Jon ]

--------------------
"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
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
Please, Please, Please "Catholic" and "Charismatic" are not mutually exclusive terms. For starters you have to make sense of this website if they were and this one.

Actually there is quite a strong symbiosis with a number of Evangelical Charismatics developing strong Catholic tendencies as they mature as Christians quite often without denigrating their charismatic roots.

Jengie

The magazine in your link refers to RC charismatics, which is surely a different thing. It's their presence in the RCC that validates their Catholicism, even if their prefered worship style is very different from the typical RC kind. Anglo-Catholicism is another kettle of fish, because it's worship style not denomination that makes them so.

My impression from this website is that Anglican and free church charismatics are beginning to adopt certain Catholic practices, but not that Anglo-Catholics are somehow incorporating charismatic flavours into their worship. Justin Welby has become more Catholic having started off with a preference for more charismatic forms of worship, not vice versa.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
moonlitdoor
Shipmate
# 11707

 - Posted      Profile for moonlitdoor   Email moonlitdoor   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:

originally posted by Angloid

A real prophet (and one would hope that an ABC would not be a false one) would surely speak about God and social justice in the same breath.

I wouldn't expect most bishops or archbishops to be prophets at all. I think their views on social policies are likely to be their own, arrived at in the same way the rest of us form our opinions. Also like the rest of us, they vary a good deal in their opinions, and it does not seem coherent to me to say that those who agree with me should speak out while those who disagree with me should shut up.

In my opinion there are enough voices raised on all sides of most issues of public policy already without bishops adding such wisdom as they possess. On the other hand there are not many voices raised to speak about what happened on the first Easter day.

--------------------
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
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
It doesn't account for straight men who think that women can be and are called to the priesthood and the episcopate or that there are gay relationships that are of the same value to God as straight ones.

I don't think that's necessarily true. Whilst as you say there are plenty of people who hold these positions because of scripture and Christ, there are other people who hold these opinions because they are supporters of secular equality, and hold that above whatever God might want. It can be self-serving to want to think of oneself as a modern, enlightened fellow who supports equality just as it can be self-serving for a woman to want to be a priest or a man to want to marry another man.

From the outside, it's hard to tell these apart, but on the inside they are fundamentally different. The type 1 - the person who is liberal because of Christ, is fundamentally, deeply Christian, although other Christians would claim that he was in error on some points.

Type 2 isn't doing so well. Type 2 is carefully not examining God's will on, for example, Dead Horse issues, because he doesn't want an answer he might not like.

There are, of course, type 1 and type 2 people with respect to all kinds of aspects of faith, not just liberalism, and you always want to try to get out of type 2.

Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
I don't think that's necessarily true. Whilst as you say there are plenty of people who hold these positions because of scripture and Christ, there are other people who hold these opinions because they are supporters of secular equality, and hold that above whatever God might want. It can be self-serving to want to think of oneself as a modern, enlightened fellow who supports equality just as it can be self-serving for a woman to want to be a priest or a man to want to marry another man.

That's a fair point. I always get worried when I see Christians saying "in this day and age" or "move with the times". What the world does is irrelevant. This is where I agree with the conservatives - if something is true in this sort of situation then it was always true and will, in general, continue to be true. I just differ on whether the prior worldly opinion in western culture on the right attitude to women and gays is closer to what God wants than the present one (for the record I doubt either worldly opinion is very close to the mark).
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159

 - Posted      Profile for Angloid     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
On the other hand there are not many voices raised to speak about what happened on the first Easter day.

And if what happened on the first Easter day doesn't have any bearing on how we treat the poor or establish a more equal society, then I don't want to be a Christian.

--------------------
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
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159

 - Posted      Profile for Angloid     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

My impression from this website is that Anglican and free church charismatics are beginning to adopt certain Catholic practices, but not that Anglo-Catholics are somehow incorporating charismatic flavours into their worship.

There are Anglo-catholic charismatics , you know.

--------------------
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
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Angloid

How exotic!

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Edward Green
Review Editor
# 46

 - Posted      Profile for Edward Green   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

My impression from this website is that Anglican and free church charismatics are beginning to adopt certain Catholic practices, but not that Anglo-Catholics are somehow incorporating charismatic flavours into their worship.

There are Anglo-catholic charismatics , you know.
Not unusual at all in the circles I wander about in these days. There is a strong sense of spiritual renewal in the history of the catholic movement after all.

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

Posts: 4893 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Edward Green:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

My impression from this website is that Anglican and free church charismatics are beginning to adopt certain Catholic practices, but not that Anglo-Catholics are somehow incorporating charismatic flavours into their worship.

There are Anglo-catholic charismatics , you know.
Not unusual at all in the circles I wander about in these days. There is a strong sense of spiritual renewal in the history of the catholic movement after all.
The terminology is just so slippery these days! Are 'spiritual renewal' and charismatic spirituality considered to be one and the same thing?

Perhaps it's not just Justin Welby who's a post-churchmanship Anglican; is the concept of Anglican churchmanship practically out of date? It would be useful to know, for future reference!

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Edward Green
Review Editor
# 46

 - Posted      Profile for Edward Green   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
The terminology is just so slippery these days! Are 'spiritual renewal' and charismatic spirituality considered to be one and the same thing?

Perhaps it's not just Justin Welby who's a post-churchmanship Anglican; is the concept of Anglican churchmanship practically out of date? It would be useful to know, for future reference!

Renewal and Charismatic are related terms. How would you define them? Perhaps the former is broader with a deeper history, whereas Charismatic refers to a particular post-pentecostal movement. I would tend to see the Charismata as essentially present in the Church - irrespective of a particular identification with the Charismatic movement.

Anglican Churchmanship is shifting as always. Within the Catholic movement there are academic and experiential streams, as there are in Evangelicalism. Sometimes those streams have more in common with others outside their tradition than within.

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

Posts: 4893 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Edward Green
Review Editor
# 46

 - Posted      Profile for Edward Green   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In reply to Mark Betts:

Hard to justify the swing other than by experience. There seem to be more Evangelical vocations than ever, and the so called liberal Catholics I meet seem to be creedal and have a significant belief in the supernatural action of God in the sacraments.

Mission primarily seems to be about bringing people into a fullness of faith in Christ. Discipleship seems to be a hot topic in very different circles.

AffCath expressed a desire to be more explicitly catholic in their annual review a couple of years back. That is when I rejoined.

The CofE does not offer the certainty of the Roman catechism - but it never did.

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

Posts: 4893 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Edward Green:
Renewal and Charismatic are related terms. How would you define them? Perhaps the former is broader with a deeper history, whereas Charismatic refers to a particular post-pentecostal movement. I would tend to see the Charismata as essentially present in the Church - irrespective of a particular identification with the Charismatic movement.

So, when you talk about something being 'Anglo-Catholic' and also 'Charismatic' you're not really talking about a rapprochement between Anglo-Catholicism and the kind of spirituality that grew out of Pentecostalism. You're basically referring to a greater spiritual commitment and enthusiasm among Anglo-Catholics.

That's fair enough, but a little confusing!

quote:

Anglican Churchmanship is shifting as always. Within the Catholic movement there are academic and experiential streams, as there are in Evangelicalism. Sometimes those streams have more in common with others outside their tradition than within.

That's fair enough, but a little confusing!

It must be very difficult for outsiders to make their way through all of this shape-shifting variety if they just want to find a suitable church to attend!

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Edward Green
Review Editor
# 46

 - Posted      Profile for Edward Green   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
So, when you talk about something being 'Anglo-Catholic' and also 'Charismatic' you're not really talking about a rapprochement between Anglo-Catholicism and the kind of spirituality that grew out of Pentecostalism. You're basically referring to a greater spiritual commitment and enthusiasm among Anglo-Catholics.

That's fair enough, but a little confusing!

No. There links between Charismatic Anglo-Catholicism and Charismatic Roman Catholicism, and the latter was one the largest parts of the Charismatic movement of late 60's and 70's. The Charismatic movement in Anglicanism, especially in the US was rooted in liturgical churches.

However the Charismatic movement has changed since that period. Even been embraced by Evangelicals! In the US at least this is known as '3rd wave' - although the US and UK have different histories.

If anything the term Renewal has been maintained in the CofE by those who have roots in the Charismatic movement of the 60s & 70s rather than the later influence of Vineyard and Wimberism.


quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
That's fair enough, but a little confusing!

It must be very difficult for outsiders to make their way through all of this shape-shifting variety if they just want to find a suitable church to attend!

Anglicans attend their Parish Church?

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

Posts: 4893 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mark Betts

Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Betts   Email Mark Betts   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Edward Green:
In reply to Mark Betts:

Hard to justify the swing other than by experience. There seem to be more Evangelical vocations than ever, and the so called liberal Catholics I meet seem to be creedal and have a significant belief in the supernatural action of God in the sacraments.

Mission primarily seems to be about bringing people into a fullness of faith in Christ. Discipleship seems to be a hot topic in very different circles.

AffCath expressed a desire to be more explicitly catholic in their annual review a couple of years back. That is when I rejoined.

The CofE does not offer the certainty of the Roman catechism - but it never did.

Thanks for that Edward. My fear is that, while these Affirming Catholics claim they are becoming more creedal (more orthodox?) - which is a good thing - is it in fact a sort of cafeteria anglo-catholicism, where they pick and choose the parts of catholicism they like and discard the bits they don't like. Note that these bits they don't like may not necessarily be the same as for theological liberals.

The situation still seems to be that some more orthodox, traditional anglo-catholics feel they are being pushed out, whilst others are leaving to join the Ordinariate.

I wonder if the C of E feels that these old-school anglo-catholics don't matter to the future of their church.

--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."

Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
The situation still seems to be that some more orthodox, traditional anglo-catholics feel they are being pushed out, whilst others are leaving to join the Ordinariate.

Not being able to force others to conform to your beliefs is not being pushed out.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Mark Betts

Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Betts   Email Mark Betts   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
The situation still seems to be that some more orthodox, traditional anglo-catholics feel they are being pushed out, whilst others are leaving to join the Ordinariate.

Not being able to force others to conform to your beliefs is not being pushed out.
I feel you are misrepresenting the whole problem Arethosemyfeet. The idea was never to force everyone else to conform to their beliefs - all they were asking for was a respected place within the Established Church, but that seems to be being denied them. Emotive dishonesty doesn't help things.

However, other un-catholic agendas are quite definitely being forced through, and anyone who disagrees is basically being told to put up or shut up. Will things change under Justin Welby? Unfortunately, I fear not.

--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."

Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
It doesn't account for straight men who think that women can be and are called to the priesthood and the episcopate or that there are gay relationships that are of the same value to God as straight ones.

I don't think that's necessarily true. Whilst as you say there are plenty of people who hold these positions because of scripture and Christ, there are other people who hold these opinions because they are supporters of secular equality, and hold that above whatever God might want. It can be self-serving to want to think of oneself as a modern, enlightened fellow who supports equality just as it can be self-serving for a woman to want to be a priest or a man to want to marry another man.

From the outside, it's hard to tell these apart, but on the inside they are fundamentally different. The type 1 - the person who is liberal because of Christ, is fundamentally, deeply Christian, although other Christians would claim that he was in error on some points.

Type 2 isn't doing so well. Type 2 is carefully not examining God's will on, for example, Dead Horse issues, because he doesn't want an answer he might not like.

There are, of course, type 1 and type 2 people with respect to all kinds of aspects of faith, not just liberalism, and you always want to try to get out of type 2.

Or there's people like me, who long ago gave up trying to force myself to believe things I don't believe, and are a sort of liberal by default because there are some things apparently required to not be one that I just don't and can't make myself believe any more than by sheer force of will I can persuade myself that grass is blue.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Edward Green:
Anglicans attend their Parish Church?

If Anglicans just attend their parish church, regardless of the churchmanship, then what's the point of all of this diversity? Surely diversity is about increasing choice?

I still don't quite understand what you're saying about Charismatic Anglo-Catholicism, but I see that it doesn't really matter anyway, because Anglican churchgoers are simply expected to attend their nearest church, disregarding what 'flavour' it happens to be.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Chorister

Completely Frocked
# 473

 - Posted      Profile for Chorister   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It would be a simple choice for me - if I had to attend my nearest church or nothing, I'd choose nothing. Thank God for variety and diversity.

--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.

Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools