|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Disagreeing well?
|
Felafool
Shipmate
# 270
|
Posted
So the EAUK has 'dismembered' Oasis because of their failure to amend their website to offer counter views to Steve Chalke's position on same sex relationships.
EAUK statement here
Oasis Trust statement here
In the light of the ABC's desire to aim to 'disagree well', is this an example of the 'Evangelical' branch of the church failing in 'good fellowship with other evangelicals' to quote the EAUK.
More importantly, it seems that agreeing on a statement of faith no longer constitutes the route to 'good fellowship'. Sadly, it seems one must also agree with every 'jot' and 'tittle' of belief and interpretaion of scripture.
I am now glad I am no longer a individual member of the EA, and am beginning to feel definitely post-evangelical, whatever that means!
Is this a bad move for EAUK, or a good one?
--------------------
I don't care if the glass is half full or half empty - I ordered a cheeseburger.
Posts: 265 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
This particular example of failing to maintain fellowship with people who disagree over an interpretation of a handful of obscure verses centers around homosexuality. We are currently discussing this in Dead Horses.
Is there any chance of a more general discussion of relationships between Christian organisations who disagree that doesn't centre on this specific example?
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Felafool
Shipmate
# 270
|
Posted
Thanks Alan Cresswell for pointing me to Dead Horses. I did try the Search option, but in this case failed to find any thread.
At a tangent, the Search really is not very helpful...you need to specify a discussion board. It would be great to search 'all boards' as an option.
I declare this thread closed.
--------------------
I don't care if the glass is half full or half empty - I ordered a cheeseburger.
Posts: 265 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153
|
Posted
There is, as Alan says, a thread in Dead Horses to discuss disagreements over same sex relationships. Take discussion of that aspect there, please.
This thread could potentially remain here for a more general discussion of Christians, churches and denominations 'disagreeing well'.
Eliab
Purgatory Host
--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"
Richard Dawkins
Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
I have always thought that the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity was rather a stupid thing for the simple reason that, so long as we accept each other's Christianity, the different modes of worship and different authority structures should be seen as nothing more than variation.
One of the biggest stumbling blocks to disagreeing well, in this context, is the insistence by some (RCC for instance) that others simply are not a church and, therefore, so not really Christian at all.
The RCC doesn't help itself in this regard with its widespread practice of re-baptising adults who decide to become RC having been CofE, for example.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
One of the biggest stumbling blocks to disagreeing well, in this context, is the insistence by some (RCC for instance) that others simply are not a church and, therefore, so not really Christian at all.
I've never really understood this objection. If one thinks it's a load of tosh then what does it matter what they think? Does your faith depend upon their acceptence?
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
The RCC doesn't help itself in this regard with its widespread practice of re-baptising adults who decide to become RC having been CofE, for example.
As a general rule the RCC doesn't rebaptise. Correction, as far as the RCC is concerned it never rebaptises. If thee was some defect in the original "baptism" then they wouldn't consider it baptism at all, or if there is some doubt as to its validity then the candidate is conditionally baptised.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hairy Biker
Shipmate
# 12086
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
I have always thought that the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity was rather a stupid thing for the simple reason that, so long as we accept each other's Christianity, the different modes of worship and different authority structures should be seen as nothing more than variation.
Unless your definition of Christian included acceptance of the authority of the church, rather than just acceptance of Jesus as Christ. If that were the case then you would be justified in considering those who didn't accept that authority as being non-Christians.
The stupid thing about the week of prayer for Christian Unity is that we can't even agree on which week we do this prayer. That is really stupid.
--------------------
there [are] four important things in life: religion, love, art and science. At their best, they’re all just tools to help you find a path through the darkness. None of them really work that well, but they help.
Damien Hirst
Posts: 683 | From: This Sceptred Isle | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
mark_in_manchester
not waving, but...
# 15978
|
Posted
quote:
One of the biggest stumbling blocks to disagreeing well, in this context, is the insistence by some (RCC for instance) that others simply are not a church and, therefore, so not really Christian at all.
Well...that's not at all my (local, personal, UK Methodist) experience of the RCC. My kids are at an RC primary school, which led me to attend their men's prayer / bible study group, weeknight services (Taize, charismatic healing) etc. I've been made very, very welcome; perhaps it's unusual here in that the priest is just as evangelical, considerably more knowledgeable, and a lot more charismatic than me - the latter in all senses!
I wouldn't presume to take communion, mind. I've worked in large organisations and had to subvert the official line to make the right thing happen. Sometimes this can blow up in one's face - I wouldn't want to put Fr P. in any unnecessary danger.
--------------------
"We are punished by our sins, not for them" - Elbert Hubbard
(so good, I wanted to see it after my posts and not only after those of shipmate JBohn from whom I stole it)
Posts: 1596 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
One of the biggest stumbling blocks to disagreeing well, in this context, is the insistence by some (RCC for instance) that others simply are not a church and, therefore, so not really Christian at all.
My understanding is that the RCC considers the "ecclesial communities" outside the RCC to not be churches, but very much to be Christian. The RCC is not in the business of allowing their sacred spaces to be used for non-Christian rites; whereas they have frequently allowed the use of RCC altars by Anglicans, including various ABCs visiting Rome, and in turn have made use of the buildings of other Christians where necessary - out here they make use of the Church of Scotland building when needed.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
