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: TEC suspended (... maybe?) (Page 2)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: TEC suspended (... maybe?)
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472

 - Posted      Profile for Augustine the Aleut     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
The whole thing is rather trite in my view. In the real world we have these wonderful faithful African Anglicans whose countries have failed to address wars with their neighbours, wars within with other Christians in their own countries, genocidal pasts and terror-wars with Islamists. And they focus on sex. Again. Better to replace the Anglican Communion with other things, and it will be more than on thing I think.
*snip*

We do need to be careful on this one-- many African wars were proxy wars for western powers, and others were financed by interests wishing access to resources. And the history of the 20th century doesn't give the first world a lot of street creds.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Meet and Right So to Do
Apprentice
# 18532

 - Posted      Profile for Meet and Right So to Do     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I wonder what this means for an Episcopalian who moves to the majority of Anglican provinces that voted to suspend the Episcopal Church.
Posts: 32 | Registered: Jan 2016  |  IP: Logged
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644

 - Posted      Profile for Beeswax Altar   Email Beeswax Altar   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Nothing...absolutely nothing
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Meet and Right So to Do
Apprentice
# 18532

 - Posted      Profile for Meet and Right So to Do     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Nothing...absolutely nothing

Really? I think a more conservative province could refuse to admit said Episcopalian to the table for communion.
Posts: 32 | Registered: Jan 2016  |  IP: Logged
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379

 - Posted      Profile for Belle Ringer   Email Belle Ringer   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Meet and Right So to Do:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Nothing...absolutely nothing

Really? I think a more conservative province could refuse to admit said Episcopalian to the table for communion.
Has that been happening in TEC churches that split - did any become closed communion? Open communion churches don't usually quiz visitors or newcomers about their specific beliefs on doctrinal details like the definition of marriage.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644

 - Posted      Profile for Beeswax Altar   Email Beeswax Altar   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Meet and Right So to Do:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Nothing...absolutely nothing

Really? I think a more conservative province could refuse to admit said Episcopalian to the table for communion.
No, the person would be a baptized Christian with a similar if not identical understanding of the Eucharist and that is all that matters.

--------------------
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
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:


My local friends have a different reaction -- shrug. "Nothing will change at the church I go to." "I sing in the choir, I'll still be singing in the same choir." "They have 3 years to catch up with us on same sex marriage."

One friend said "It means we are no longer part of a global community, but this was predicted 15 years ago when TEC decided homosexuality is not a sin."

Where I live most churchgoers, including those at Episcopal parishes, are essentially congregationalists. They choose a local church without a lot of regard for denominational affiliation.

quote:
The conservatives including many African churches simply cannot accept the liberal TEC as "one of us." Whether or not I agree with them, I admire their refusal to be bought by the 30% of the budget that comes from TEC (as stated above).
Do we know for sure that the primates have even talked about forgoing the funding from TEC?
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rossweisse

High Church Valkyrie
# 2349

 - Posted      Profile for Rossweisse     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I consider myself a Christian first, a (non-Roman) Catholic second, an Anglican third, and an Episcopalian fourth, even though the last of these looms largest, being local. I find this distressing.

I missed the part about the acne people being admitted as a province. What scuzzy politics were involved in it?

--------------------
I'm not dead yet.

Posts: 15117 | From: Valhalla | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379

 - Posted      Profile for Belle Ringer   Email Belle Ringer   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Where I live most churchgoers, including those at Episcopal parishes, are essentially congregationalists. They choose a local church without a lot of regard for denominational affiliation.

Good point. While some people identify with a denomination, a lot just pick a comfortable church - which may be similar in feel to the last one but not necessarily the same denomination.

quote:
The conservatives including many African churches simply cannot accept the liberal TEC as "one of us." Whether or not I agree with them, I admire their refusal to be bought by the 30% of the budget that comes from TEC (as stated above).
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Do we know for sure that the primates have even talked about forgoing the funding from TEC?

Fair enough. And for the next three years I expect nothing may change, but if TEC gets totally kicked out, will they keep financially supporting a group who don't want them?
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Demas
Ship's Deserter
# 24

 - Posted      Profile for Demas     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Given the stated beliefs of the various parties, what could possibly change in three years?

--------------------
They did not appear very religious; that is, they were not melancholy; and I therefore suspected they had not much piety - Life of Rev John Murray

Posts: 1894 | From: Thessalonica | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lyda*Rose

Ship's broken porthole
# 4544

 - Posted      Profile for Lyda*Rose   Email Lyda*Rose   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That TEC will not even be nominally part of the Anglican Communion, that's what. [Frown]

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

Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Joesaphat
Shipmate
# 18493

 - Posted      Profile for Joesaphat   Email Joesaphat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
How is it the primates are allowed to derail synodical processes and speak for entire churches just like that? When and how were they ever vested with such immense powers? AFAIK, Abp Justin is simply not in any position to pronounce for the entire Church of England so.

--------------------
Opening my mouth and removing all doubt, online.

Posts: 418 | From: London | Registered: Oct 2015  |  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 Mudfrog:
On that last point should it not be the group that wants to change the organisation - and can't get the support - should be be the ones to leave?

Why should the majority view, the oldest view - the founding view indeed - be the one to change to suit the new minority view?

Indeed. The oldest view is that the Anglican Communion is a collective of independent churches, each having authority within its own province. The communion is bound together by the Chicago-Lambeth quadrilateral, and has no statement of common doctrine beyond that laid out in the creeds. GAFCON have been pushing to make homophobia a shibboleth for membership of the communion, and that is a grotesque innovation and distortion of the tradition of the communion. Fundamental to the nature of Anglicanism is that no primate has authority to interfere with the actions of another province. If provinces object they are free to withdraw from the communion.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I agree. GAFCON is as you might expect being extremely selective. I see that its Secretary is Dr Jensen who IIRC- and Australian shipmates please correct me on this if I'm wrong- supports or supported lay presidency at the Eucharist. Now that is at least as big a breach of Anglican practice as SSM, but that, it seems, is not an issue for GAFCON.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Stephen
Shipmate
# 40

 - Posted      Profile for Stephen   Email Stephen   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This is what is actually worrying me. It's as though the Anglican Communion is becoming more 'Roman' - will there be an Anglican magisterium for instance? And that's something which GAFCON might not like in other respects.

Interesting that ++Barry had other commitments Albertus although I do think the 'wanting to spend more time with my family' is a trifle over-worked .......

However it might be true!

However I'm surprised at the restraint of American shipmates - if I were American I would not be feeling quite so sanguine and would quickly find there are other deserving causes for Episcopal money - and this is over an issue I haven't really got a settled view - or at least I have mixed feelings.

--------------------
Best Wishes
Stephen

'Be still,then, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the nations and I will be exalted in the earth' Ps46 v10

Posts: 3954 | From: Alto C Clef Country | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379

 - Posted      Profile for Belle Ringer   Email Belle Ringer   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
The oldest view is that the Anglican Communion is a collective of independent churches, each having authority within its own province. The communion is bound together by the Chicago-Lambeth quadrilateral, and has no statement of common doctrine beyond that laid out in the creeds. GAFCON have been pushing to make homophobia a shibboleth for membership....

I watched a similar battle about 20 years ago, when the Southern Baptist Convention, an association of independent churches, got taken over by militant conservatives who demanded their doctrines (including removing women from clergy positions) be imposed on all churches. Many groups of churches left and formed their own associations, SBC ceased being the largest protestant denomination in the USA, and I guess everyone ended up happier because both liberal churches and conservatives ones no longer had to deal with the tensions of living in the same tent.

How conservatives get the power to overrule the way an association of churches has been functioning for ages, I don't know. Maybe they are more intensely focused on a specific clear goal than the liberals?

Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768

 - Posted      Profile for Penny S     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Dr Jensen was on the radio this morning, and was projecting attitudes I did not find in the least attractive. Not just what he was saying, but his tone (and I was careful to edit out the Australian-ness). I would not want to be in his church - he seemed very self satisfied, and careless of the feelings of the people he was preaching against. Who would be welcomed, but helped. That's "Help" with a capital, and unsought for.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
If Beeswax Altar - ably assisted by RuthW - were to come to the UK as a missionary, I'd welcome them both with open arms ... we need all the help we can get ...

However, I suspect (although I might be wrong) that Beeswax Altar in particular might be surprised to find how far many UK Anglicans are from his view of a shared understanding of the Eucharist ...

I can't speak for TEC or ACNA, but the folk I've met from those sort of backgrounds certainly tend to have a more 'developed' view of the Eucharist than some evangelical Anglicans here in the UK who are essentially Baptists in all but name ...

I'm not knocking the Baptists, but one might expect Anglicans to have a - for want of a better word - 'fuller' or more 'developed' view of the Eucharist ...

But I recognise I'm over-simplifying things.

On the ACNA thing, I read somewhere that their head-honcho was allowed to listen and comment but not to vote.

That said, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Welby and others would like to have ACNA as another - or an alternative - Anglican province in the USA.

--------------------
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
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think it would be really interesting if different parishes in England determined that they wanted to have oversight from different Provinces - say Rwanda, but maybe also Wales, ECUSA etc.

That'd totally put a spanner in the works - although the property arrangements would be a real headache to sort out.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
leftfieldlover
Shipmate
# 13467

 - Posted      Profile for leftfieldlover         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Someone close to me (NOT a Christian) said to me this morning - 'your Church seems to be moving backwards rather than forwards. What is going on?' I could ask the same question. Deep down in my heart though, I know that something dreadful happened yesterday and I can't see how we can get out of it.
Posts: 164 | From: oxford | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
fletcher christian

Mutinous Seadog
# 13919

 - Posted      Profile for fletcher christian   Email fletcher christian   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Posted by Mudfrog:
quote:

On that last point should it not be the group that wants to change the organisation - and can't get the support - should be be the ones to leave?

Why should the majority view, the oldest view - the founding view indeed - be the one to change to suit the new minority view?

You would be right based on a complete misunderstanding of what the Anglican Communion is and what it means to be an Anglican/Episcopalian. First and foremost, the Anglican Communion is not a 'confessing church', neither is it the Anglican Communion a Global Anglican Church or a church set in stone that has never experienced doctrinal change or adaptation. It is based on a system of provinces that since its foundation have had the autonomy to respond to the call of the Gospel in its own culture and situation but having the prophetic call and consideration of the wider communion within its remit for consideration. What this primates meeting represents is a dramatic shift away from traditional, foundational Anglicanism/Episcopalianism, whereby the autonomy of a church within a province can find itself restricted by the quams of another province many hundreds of thousands of miles away from it that may also have its own corrupt political system to prop up - yes, I'm looking at you Uganda. It represents the dissolving of the Anglican Communion in favour of a global church and a subversion of the authority of the primates to meet in a consultation and immediately issue an edict for the entire communion for which they had no authority and which as not even in the remit of the meeting (unless we were told prokies and political shenanigans have been going on in the background for some time).

As GAFCON have already announced, this is not the end, but merely the beginning. The placation of those who do not actually wish to be Anglicans in an Anglican communion any longer has just opened a whole can of worms. The next issue will be the suspension of other provinces for ordaining gay and lesbian clergy, quickly followed by a desire to tighten the stance on divorce and the remarriage of divorcees in church, a hope for the reversal of the ordination of women (I accept that not all in the enclave desire this, but a substantial number do) and the push for lay presidency. There are already many hundreds of denominations out there that cater for these tastes. Why do they not have the courage to leave what they know does not suit them? Instead they will try to make a church in their image, governed by an elite hierarchy answerable to no-one and with a system of puppet bishops and synods. It's a very sad day and I can only hope that someone who is able to do so has the nerve to challenge the subverted authority and the backstage politics that has allowed this to occur.

--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan

Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
fletcher christian

Mutinous Seadog
# 13919

 - Posted      Profile for fletcher christian   Email fletcher christian   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Posted by Stephen:
quote:

This is what is actually worrying me. It's as though the Anglican Communion is becoming more 'Roman' - will there be an Anglican magisterium for instance?

That is precisely what has happened. The Primates have made decisions on Anglican polity, ethics, doctrine, faith and practice without any recourse to Bishops or their convened synods. We are now effectively being ruled by an elite answerable to no-one.

--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan

Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675

 - Posted      Profile for Komensky   Email Komensky   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'll say this—security is tight. Employees of the Cathedral can't even get into the area where the primates are meeting.

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
seasick

...over the edge
# 48

 - Posted      Profile for seasick   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Stephen:
Interesting that ++Barry had other commitments Albertus although I do think the 'wanting to spend more time with my family' is a trifle over-worked .......

With the news this morning of the death of Abp Barry's wife, I think that may explain his absence.

May she rest in peace.

--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley

Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stephen
Shipmate
# 40

 - Posted      Profile for Stephen   Email Stephen   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Oh I'm sorry to hear that Seasick
My bad- I shouldn't have been so unkind.....

--------------------
Best Wishes
Stephen

'Be still,then, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the nations and I will be exalted in the earth' Ps46 v10

Posts: 3954 | From: Alto C Clef Country | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
The next issue will be the suspension of other provinces for ordaining gay and lesbian clergy, quickly followed by a desire to tighten the stance on divorce and the remarriage of divorcees in church, a hope for the reversal of the ordination of women

Well at least that would be consistent, as I have observed here...
quote:
the autonomy of a church within a province can find itself restricted by the quams of another province many hundreds of thousands of miles away from it
I didn't realise the Anglican Communion extended to beyond the moon... [Biased]

But seriously, you make a lot of solid points in my view.

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Joesaphat:
How is it the primates are allowed to derail synodical processes and speak for entire churches just like that? When and how were they ever vested with such immense powers? AFAIK, Abp Justin is simply not in any position to pronounce for the entire Church of England so.

Indeed.

Why bother with a synod at all?

--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk

Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713

 - Posted      Profile for Sioni Sais   Email Sioni Sais   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Posted by Stephen:
quote:

This is what is actually worrying me. It's as though the Anglican Communion is becoming more 'Roman' - will there be an Anglican magisterium for instance?

That is precisely what has happened. The Primates have made decisions on Anglican polity, ethics, doctrine, faith and practice without any recourse to Bishops or their convened synods. We are now effectively being ruled by an elite answerable to no-one.
Well, they're answerable to God. I wonder what He thinks of them?

--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"

(Paul Sinha, BBC)

Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116

 - Posted      Profile for Mudfrog   Email Mudfrog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Posted by Mudfrog:
quote:

On that last point should it not be the group that wants to change the organisation - and can't get the support - should be be the ones to leave?

Why should the majority view, the oldest view - the founding view indeed - be the one to change to suit the new minority view?

You would be right based on a complete misunderstanding of what the Anglican Communion is and what it means to be an Anglican/Episcopalian. First and foremost, the Anglican Communion is not a 'confessing church', neither is it the Anglican Communion a Global Anglican Church or a church set in stone that has never experienced doctrinal change or adaptation. It is based on a system of provinces that since its foundation have had the autonomy to respond to the call of the Gospel in its own culture and situation but having the prophetic call and consideration of the wider communion within its remit for consideration. What this primates meeting represents is a dramatic shift away from traditional, foundational Anglicanism/Episcopalianism, whereby the autonomy of a church within a province can find itself restricted by the quams of another province many hundreds of thousands of miles away from it that may also have its own corrupt political system to prop up - yes, I'm looking at you Uganda. It represents the dissolving of the Anglican Communion in favour of a global church and a subversion of the authority of the primates to meet in a consultation and immediately issue an edict for the entire communion for which they had no authority and which as not even in the remit of the meeting (unless we were told prokies and political shenanigans have been going on in the background for some time).

As GAFCON have already announced, this is not the end, but merely the beginning. The placation of those who do not actually wish to be Anglicans in an Anglican communion any longer has just opened a whole can of worms. The next issue will be the suspension of other provinces for ordaining gay and lesbian clergy, quickly followed by a desire to tighten the stance on divorce and the remarriage of divorcees in church, a hope for the reversal of the ordination of women (I accept that not all in the enclave desire this, but a substantial number do) and the push for lay presidency. There are already many hundreds of denominations out there that cater for these tastes. Why do they not have the courage to leave what they know does not suit them? Instead they will try to make a church in their image, governed by an elite hierarchy answerable to no-one and with a system of puppet bishops and synods. It's a very sad day and I can only hope that someone who is able to do so has the nerve to challenge the subverted authority and the backstage politics that has allowed this to occur.

I am learning something here of course. I'm obviously not an Anglican (no dogs in this fight and all that) and I (apparently) come from a 'confessing church' that does have a strong set of doctrines and values.

But really I was referring to this sentence by Fletcher Christian:

quote:
...what seems to have been core to the church I love seems to have been completely white washed over to placate a group that want something else but who have lacked the courage to leave it.
The group that is allegedly being placated is the Africans and the implication of the above sentence is that if they want something different (to TEC) then it is they who should leave.

But as an outsider it seems to me that this implies that TEC and its supporters actually want the whole Anglican communion to agree with them and thereby destroy the thing you say you want to keep, namely a communion that has 'the autonomy to respond to the call of the Gospel in its own culture and situation', by telling the traditionalists to leave so that the 'modern' view of ssm can pervade the whole without let or hindrance.

It also suggests that the Africans are the ones wanting change when in actual fact it's TEC. The African position (shared of course by evangelical Anglicans, conservative Anglicans and Anglo-Catholics from whatever country) are the ones who want things to stay as the majority have wanted for centuries.

From a business point of view, it seems to me that a minority group of share holders has tried to take over the group of companies in a hostile buy-out and have been thwarted. Surely the minority group has not persuaded the majority of their case and have lost the argument.

Therefore, the logical thing to do is not complain that 'the majority don't like us and anyway we don't agree with their decision-making process,' but actually to do what TEC wants the Africans to do and say, 'We can't change the church which no longer suits our divergent position on XYZ, therefore (Anglican style) we'll go and form our own group and leave the majority to sink or swim according to their own convictions.'

[ 15. January 2016, 11:50: Message edited by: Mudfrog ]

--------------------
"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
beatmenace
Shipmate
# 16955

 - Posted      Profile for beatmenace   Email beatmenace   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Its a classic 4th Century (onwards) solution. If you have a dispute in the Church , decide which party is the more influential / shouts loudest and banish the other one.

The problem here, as with Slavery, and Ordination of Women is that BOTH sides can make an argument for their their position from the Bible, although it seems to me that history and tradition have been big factors here too.

With the former there was a decision made which now seems blindingly obvious , and with the latter, an agreement to disagree.

I would have much rather seen the latter strategy followed - like a sensible 21st Century compromise. But it looks like the Ostrich's Time Machine has been used instead.

But I do agree with the last poster as well - the challenger is TEC - so an affirmation of the mainstream position was always a possible outcome.

I just think that where we are now as a society that is actually worse than useless, as a response.

[ 15. January 2016, 12:02: Message edited by: beatmenace ]

--------------------
"I'm the village idiot , aspiring to great things." (The Icicle Works)

Posts: 297 | From: Whitley Bay | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Question: why three years - what's the significance of that time frame?

--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)

Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
seasick

...over the edge
# 48

 - Posted      Profile for seasick   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In TEC their General Convention is supreme and the Presiding Bishop can't bind it. It next meets in 2018 so presumably they intend to come back to the question in the light of what the General Convention does.

--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley

Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
fletcher christian

Mutinous Seadog
# 13919

 - Posted      Profile for fletcher christian   Email fletcher christian   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Posted by Mudfrog:
quote:

The group that is allegedly being placated is the Africans and the implication of the above sentence is that if they want something different (to TEC) then it is they who should leave.

But as an outsider it seems to me that this implies that TEC and its supporters actually want the whole Anglican communion to agree with them and thereby destroy the thing you say you want to keep, namely a communion that has 'the autonomy to respond to the call of the Gospel in its own culture and situation', by telling the traditionalists to leave so that the 'modern' view of ssm can pervade the whole without let or hindrance.

I wish it were as simple as you state, but it is far more nuanced and complex. I understand that you are coming from a different tradition, so I will try, as far as possible, to explain some of it.

It isn't the 'African church' or the 'Africans' who are being placated. There are some provinces within Africa, some split away groups like ACNA, a pressure group known as GAFCON which houses a number of Bishops and clergy from various places all with varying axes to grind, part of the Diocese of Sydney and a few other small churches within dioceses around the world. They are all seemingly united on one thing - the ability for one part of the world wide Anglican Communion to be able to dictate to another part of the Anglican Communion as to exactly how they should live the Gospel in their province, culture and situation. This idea strikes at the heart of what Anglicanism/Episcopalianism is and dissolves the original intention of the idea of Communion. Some of these groups have within them pressure groups who see this as a way of consolidating support for their particular axe, corrupt churches and even whole provinces that are known to be in league with corrupt governments and political parties in power to propagate a steady flow of human rights abuses (which aren't all to do with sexuality; in fact many of them aren't about this issue at all and these provinces and churches within dioceses have not been suspended but have had the rest of the Communion put their finger on an issue), some very hard-line fundamentalists, some very conservative (but not fundamentalist), some who long for power for various reasons, some who very genuinely feel aggrieved at what has gone on in other parts of the Anglican Communion and feel changes in one part of the Communion does in fact change it in all, some who feel that TEC and others have moved out of the area of sound doctrine placing themselves in a difficult position of whether or not they should be called 'Christian' and some who genuinely desire to see the dissolving of the concept of an Anglican Communion.

The fact is that what TEC has done may be wrong in the view of others, but there is no requirement whatsoever that everyone else must therefore follow suit and do what TEC does. Those supporting TEC either do so because they see this as an issue that needs to be addressed within their own province or because they feel that TEC should have the autonomy to make its own decisions in this matter in order to protect the integrity of the original concept of the Anglican Communion rather than going down the route of a global Anglican church. Nobody is telling the traditionalists to leave, but there does come a moment when those who find themselves in a church that they are at complete odds with in terms of founding principles and currently working polity must ask themselves if they should remain in it. Some feel that they must not leave it and instead they should change it from within to make it something different. This is a position that personally I disagree with because ultimately it lacks any integrity in faith and practice. If it was the other way around and the majority of the church was ACNA, GAFCON and the like and I was in the minority and working against the church to create an Anglican Communion rather than a global Anglican Church then yes, I would leave it immediately. I can't imagine living with myself if I was in a small enclave wanting to change an entire communion of over 85 million members for my own personal satisfaction. I wouldn't be able to sleep at night.

As it was, the Anglican Communion had an incredible prophetic opportunity in today's fractious, constantly outraged world where fundamentalism looms larger with each passing day. We could have been a shining light to demonstrate how people of faith could actually learn to live together with all those tensions and difficulties and even profound disagreement. It was something that the world today desperately needs an example of, especially in the church. As it is, a Pimates meeting has just done its darndest to snuff that wick.

--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan

Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
If it was the other way around and the majority of the church was ACNA, GAFCON and the like and I was in the minority and working against the church to create an Anglican Communion rather than a global Anglican Church then yes, I would leave it immediately.

Partly out of curiosity, and partly to make sure I've followed your reasoning, does that mean you would not support a lobby within the Catholic church on, say SSM?

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
fletcher christian

Mutinous Seadog
# 13919

 - Posted      Profile for fletcher christian   Email fletcher christian   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
A lobby or a unilateral demand enacted upon?

--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan

Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
A lobby or a unilateral demand enacted upon?

Well one of the things I'm learning from this discussion is the vast breadth of the supposed room for diversity provided for in the Anglican Communion - such that (if I've understood you correctly) one bit of it can universally enact something quite controversial without (it believes) excluding itself. This seems very different from how things would play out in the RCC.

In other words, you seem to be saying that you're (I assume) an Anglican because there is (you think/thought) room for unity in (a lot of) diversity, which is not the case (organisationally) in the RCC.

[ 15. January 2016, 12:58: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Eirenist
Shipmate
# 13343

 - Posted      Profile for Eirenist         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Oh well - we'll just have to alter our parish church's 'All Welcome' board by adding the words 'even members of TEC'.

--------------------
'I think I think, therefore I think I am'

Posts: 486 | From: Darkest Metroland | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Eirenist
Shipmate
# 13343

 - Posted      Profile for Eirenist         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
More seriously, the three-year period does give time for the saner elements (if any) on both sides to think over the implications of what has been done. That, I guess, is what Justin Welby hopes.

--------------------
'I think I think, therefore I think I am'

Posts: 486 | From: Darkest Metroland | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
fletcher christian

Mutinous Seadog
# 13919

 - Posted      Profile for fletcher christian   Email fletcher christian   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm not sure you can compare as an example a lobby group in the RC church where the structure, polity and the outworking of faith and practice can be different and in some cases radically different. On that basis I'd have difficulties trying to answer your question.

--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan

Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Well one of the things I'm learning from this discussion is the vast breadth of the supposed room for diversity provided for in the Anglican Communion - such that (if I've understood you correctly) one bit of it can universally enact something quite controversial without (it believes) excluding itself. This seems very different from how things would play out in the RCC.

The Anglican Communion is not the Roman Catholic Church. Some of the names and titles are similar, but the Anglican church is not a global church in the same way that the RCC is.

quote:
In other words, you seem to be saying that you're (I assume) an Anglican because there is (you think/thought) room for unity in (a lot of) diversity, which is not the case (organisationally) in the RCC.
I think there is a fair amount of diversity in the RCC actually, but one of the features of the Anglican setup (on various scales) is that the structure allows people to get on with things as they see fit.

Which is why the statements from the Primates in Canterbury are so odd. They shouldn't be able to make these kind of statements because they have no authority to say such things.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
I'm not sure you can compare as an example a lobby group in the RC church where the structure, polity and the outworking of faith and practice can be different and in some cases radically different. On that basis I'd have difficulties trying to answer your question.

I'm confused. Your illustration suggested to me that if the minority push was for a "communion" model to replace an existing "global" church, you wouldn't support it, by virtue of it being a minority. Is that what you mean? That basically the minority should always simply leave?

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768

 - Posted      Profile for Penny S     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm afraid to say that my brain is insisting on filing all references to primates in the zoology section. Possibly relating to a recent programme in which some were taking away peoples' valuables so that the people ransomed them by giving them what they wanted.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009  |  IP: Logged
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116

 - Posted      Profile for Mudfrog   Email Mudfrog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In which case, why does it matter so much to GAFCON what TEC says and does; and why does TEC care about what GAFCON says and does?

And why, if you're all so independent and able to act under your own authority, do you even bother to meet and discuss stuff?

Why not get on with what you do in the US and let the others get on with what they want to do?

It seems TEC wants to act as it would like and have an opinion about what the others are doing, but doesn't want anyone else to have the freedom to do the same or have an opinion about TEC.

--------------------
"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
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472

 - Posted      Profile for Augustine the Aleut     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Joesaphat:
How is it the primates are allowed to derail synodical processes and speak for entire churches just like that? When and how were they ever vested with such immense powers? AFAIK, Abp Justin is simply not in any position to pronounce for the entire Church of England so.

Remember how the primates, about twenty years ago, declared a number of Rwandan dioceses vacant on account of their bishops having behaved scandalously during the genocide? Perhaps there were protests against their over-reach then, but I cannot recall them.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:


Why not get on with what you do in the US and let the others get on with what they want to do?


Good question. As discussed above, I think the problem is that disintegration in the global communion would lead to complete collapse in England - if, for example, GAFCON left then quite a few English parishes may also want to go, conversely if ECUSA left, it is quite possible many English parishes would also go. In my view this means that the AB of C is always in crisis mode, trying to hold things together globally in order to keep things together locally.

In practice I'm fairly convinced that everyone would be better just biting the bullet and going their own way.

quote:
It seems TEC wants to act as it would like and have an opinion about what the others are doing, but doesn't want anyone else to have the freedom to do the same or have an opinion about TEC.
Well that's an interesting point of view. Others argue that some of the GAFCON provinces are constantly forcing this issue as a smokescreen to avoid talking about other issues - for example the issue of polygamy is tolerated in some provinces (which is ironic given the statements about marriage in yesterday's Canterbury press release). Also one might point to notorious Anglican leaders in some parts of the world who have been able to get away with various alleged human rights abuses - without any kind of comment by the global Anglican Primates.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Full Canterbury Communique just released.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Meet and Right So to Do
Apprentice
# 18532

 - Posted      Profile for Meet and Right So to Do     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:

Where I live most churchgoers, including those at Episcopal parishes, are essentially congregationalists. They choose a local church without a lot of regard for denominational affiliation.

I've been saying this for a long, long time.

Denominational differences, at least among mainline U.S. protestants, are no longer important for most churchgoers. I doubt any Presbyterians are going to raid the local Episcopal/Anglican church and burn the vestments or tear down the rails in the chancel.

The only real difference between United Methodists, Presbyterian Church USA, United Church of Christ and the Episcopal Church are polity and churchmanship. Doctrinal and theological stances are pretty much the same now.

Posts: 32 | Registered: Jan 2016  |  IP: Logged
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757

 - Posted      Profile for Ricardus   Author's homepage   Email Ricardus   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:


It seems TEC wants to act as it would like and have an opinion about what the others are doing, but doesn't want anyone else to have the freedom to do the same or have an opinion about TEC.

Replace 'TEC' with 'GAFCON' and I would agree with you. As far as I know, TEC have never tried to kick anyone out of the Communion, or ever said that GAFCON churches have to celebrate SSM.

--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)

Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lyda*Rose

Ship's broken porthole
# 4544

 - Posted      Profile for Lyda*Rose   Email Lyda*Rose   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
In which case, why does it matter so much to GAFCON what TEC says and does; and why does TEC care about what GAFCON says and does?

And why, if you're all so independent and able to act under your own authority, do you even bother to meet and discuss stuff?

Why not get on with what you do in the US and let the others get on with what they want to do?

It seems TEC wants to act as it would like and have an opinion about what the others are doing, but doesn't want anyone else to have the freedom to do the same or have an opinion about TEC.

Sure, both/all sides may have an opinion and TEC can deal with that. TEC, however, is not the church suspending those who disagree with it from having an official voice in the Anglican Communion. Your opinion reminds me of those who claim they are oppressed by the fact that others are shaking off their own oppression. If those excluded people finally have a voice, the traditionalists on Dead Horse issues apparently claim that it invalidates the Christian credentials of those who hold fast to their right to suppress people with differing opinions.

Pul-eez.

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

Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

Well, they're answerable to God. I wonder what He thinks of them? [/QB][/QUOTE]

Steady on, this is Anglicanism we are talking about ...

Everyone knows that the CofE is answerable to the Queen and Parliament that the other Provinces are answerable to who knows who ... ?
[Biased] [Razz]

More seriously, I feel bad even joking about this ... however things pan out it'll be a cause of pain, strain and distress to a great many people.

--------------------
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



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 
 
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