Easy peasy surely. Only got the question on nirvana wrong.
You really want to compare Joseph in Genesis to Nelson Mandela?
It is just possible that Mandela was the only person who could end apartheid in S. Africa, but at a very, very, very high price.
I hope once the media hype all subsides about him that some of the other facts surrounding him get more attention. Then everyone can make an informed judgment of the pro’s and con’s.
For a start, one could read this very carefully; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_Mandela
14/15 for choosing the answer I knew was incorrect.
The problem I see with the new regimen is not that minorities are represented. It’s that the children are not singing or learning any really good music. It’s all contemporary pop stuff. The point is, why bother having a concert at all? It would be better to drop the whole thing and have a couple of annual concerts in which the various musically rich traditions can be explored by children. It is simply true that a great deal of good choral music comes from religious traditions. To wipe all that out in favor of Frosty the Snowman deprives the children and their audiences.
I loved this.
A few years ago there was a similar story about a man who left some millions to various churches and social services in his town. The cool part was that when they spent what they needed, the groups started giving the leftovers to each others, including a church started after the fellow made his will.
And yes, dmitri, my first grade teacher was Mrs. Caldwell, who taught me in 1957. I remember my second grade teacher, too, but she was really pretty.
We pray the bishops reject the PR, but the fact that it got this far is a positive predictor for the eventual approval of same sex blessings in the CofE. For the progressive agenda does not stop even when rejected.
In his letter to Christ Church, Johnston wrote of how “support from such an iconic place as Christ Church will be very helpful indeed for the witness of our Diocese in this matter of pastoral care for all of our people…I look forward to working with you for LGBT inclusion in every way that I can.”
A clear indication of what happens when pastoral care becomes divorced from a sound theology grounded in holy scripture.
15/15 but it’s not a hard quiz!
I have gratefully left TEC so I really don’t care what Bp. Johnson is doing. TEC is an irrelevant marginal sect. But, the thing that is totally whacky is how two lesbians who shun tradition, or even turn tradition on its head at every turn want to have a “wedding” with white gowns and veils. I can’t even think of the correct English word to describe that idiocy.
Dr. Noll is absolutely right. Although I think he has actually understated how bad the Pilling Report is. Maybe all that time teaching in Uganda has caused him to absorb some of the British tendency toward understatement.
It is now abundantly clear that GAFCON II’s endorsement of the AMiE and the call in Nairobi to raise significant funds to underwrite an aggressive campaign to support the planting of new churches and the training of new clergy who will be faithful to the authentic gospel even if they must function outside the structures of the CoE was a very timely move. Indeed, the need is now urgent. There is clearly a need fror haste in amassing the funds and personnel needed to make the AMiE a large and powerful force in England.
Hats off to Jeff Walton for calling attention to this scandalous affair. Complete with a photo of two women in wedding gowns that really says it all.
As someone who was a licensed priest in the Dioc. of VA for many years, I still am stunned and amazed at how quickly and radically the diocdese has lurched far to the left since the big conservative churches left in 2006-2007. +Shannon Johnston likes to portray himself as a moderate and a consensus-builder who continues the centrist “middle aisle” approach of +Peter James Lee, but in reality he is fully committed to furthering not only the whole pro-gay agenda but more importantly, he fully and openly endorses the theological and moral relativism that underlies that agenda. Walton is absolutely right in connecting the two things and highlighting the bishop’s flagrant public association with the likes of Dominic Crossan and John Shelby Spong. +Lee would never have done what Johnston did, in providing a platform for the outrageously heretical remarks of those two notorious “debunkers” of historic Christianity, whereby Jonston condoned, promoted, and even implicitly celebrated their caustic, sneering attacks on the apostolic faith. Clearly, +Shannon Johnston is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. He’s a smooth talker, but he no longer feels the need to appear all that moderate anymore since the hardcore conservatives have now revolted and left.
Two more quick points. For a long time, I’ve had the hunch that +Johnston is positioning himself for being the next PB. He knows which way the wind is blowing in TEC (to the left), and he is trimming his sails accordingly.
Second, it shouldn’t be forgotten that +Johnston came to Richmond from Biloxi, MS, the home of Don Wildmon and his conservative radio hetwork that is one of the major crusading forces in the Culture War. +Johnston is one of those many, many clergy in TEC who think that Fundamentalism is the archenemy, and that Southern Fundamentalism in particular represents everything that is most vile and contrary to the “enlightened” Episcopal way. Don’t get me wrong. I’m no fan of Don Wildmon or southern Fundamentalism, but what metters is that Wildmon is on the right side of the Culture War, and +Johnston is on the wrong side.
What in the world would old evangelical bishop William Meade (a founder of Virginia Seminary and an ardent champion of theological orthodoxy) think of +Johnston??
English has become the lingua franca.
and perhaps his lawyer has some questions to answer from the Bar Council.
Mind you, Tim Dakin wouldn’t be the first bishop of Winchester to end up in the Tower of London for breaking his oath to the monarch and the law.
A complicated man with a complicated and at times controversial history. Prayers for his family and the people of South Africa.
Clear and concise. No muddle. PTL!
Queen’s Counsel also take the Oath of Allegiance on appointment.
Fascinating. As far as I understand it the Laws of the Bailiwick of Jersey are made by HM the Queen in her right as Duke of Normandy on the advice of the States of Jersey.
Canon C 13 - Of the Oath of Allegiance
1. Every person whose election to any archbishopric or bishopric is to be confirmed, or who is to be consecrated or translated to any suffragan bishopric, or to be ordained priest or deacon, or to be instituted, installed, licensed or admitted to any office in the Church of England or otherwise serve in any place, shall first, in the presence of the archbishop or bishop by whom his election to such archbishopric or bishopric is to be confirmed, or in whose province such suffragan bishopric is situate, or by whom he is to be ordained, instituted, installed, licensed or admitted, or of the commissary of such archbishop or bishop, take the Oath of Allegiance in the form following:
I, A B, do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, her heirs and successors, according to law: So help me God.
Have the Church of England lawyers really advised the Bishop of Winchester to commit sedition and perhaps treason against Her Majesty in her territories? And what of the oaths and duties the lawyers have undertaken?
Didn’t Thomas a Becket try something similar?
Without knowing exactly what the Dean supposedly did, I still can not see why the Bishop’s letter is bizarre. When, at ordination, the candidate makes certain promises to the Bishop, he is making them unreservedly. Certainly, if he feels that the Bishop is out of line, legally, canonically, or morally, he may choose to challenge the Bishop’s directives. In this case, however, his position depends upon the Bishop’s appointment.
I see nothing bizarre about any supervisor removing an employee from a position in which the employee chooses not to follow the supervisor’s mandate. The provisions for legal, medical, and financial aid are generous, so, it would seem that this is nothing more than what is often called “suspension with pay” when similar questions arise over school teachers, police officers, etc. and the way in which they perform their duties.
There is no biblical precedent for facilitated conversation. The facilitated conversations, like the appointed ad hoc committees, are tools to manipulate the outcome.
On leaving the movie Hunger Games Catching Fire, a friend commented, “Just like the Episcopal Church—totally rigged game.”
A nice story. The truth is every good first-grade teacher affects the lives of others for a hundred years even if they never accumulate any monetary wealth.
I’m reading two devotional books this Advent, and I highly recommend them both. They’re very different than the book that Kendall linked… but I thought I’d share them here (and perhaps encourage other readers too to share what they’re reading this Advent!).
1) John Piper’s FREE Advent devotional “Good News of Great Joy” - a short (1 1/2 pages, generally) daily devotional for Advent based on Luke’s gospel.
I appreciated what Piper wrote about Zechariah (Luke 1:68-71). In his song following John the Baptist’s birth, Zechariah prophecies “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for he has visited and redeemed his people and has raised up a horn of salvation…” Piper writes:
“First, nine months earlier, Zechariah could not believe his wife would have a child. Now, filled with the Holy Spirit, he is so confident of God’s redeeming work in the coming Messiah that he puts it in the past tense. For the mind of faith, a promised act of God is as good as done. Zechariah has learned to take God at his word and so has a remarkable assurance: God has visited and redeemed!”
2) The second book I’m reading is Ann Voskamp’s “The Greatest Gift: Unwrapping the Full Love Story.” This is basically a Jesse Tree for adults… a devotional a day unwrapping the history of salvation. (There are actually accompanying ornaments you can make.) Ann is an amazing writer and this book is FULL of beauty and insight. Not free, but really worth the price! (it’s available both in print and as an ebook)
Find out more here: Ann Voskamp Advent book
and at Ann’s website here: http://www.aholyexperience.com/
Here’s an excerpt from her December 3rd entry on Adam & Eve and the Fall a chapter which I’ve highlighted extensively because she has so many beautiful and powerful insights. On God’s question to Adam & Eve, “where are you” she writes:
“We only find out where we are when we find out where He is. We only find ourselves… when we find Him. We lost ourselves at one tree. And only find ourselves at another. [...]
In all humanity’s religions, man reaches after God. But in all His relationships, God reaches for man. Reaches for you when you have fallen and scraped your heart raw, for you who feel the shame of words that have snaked off your tongue and poisoned corners of your life, for you who keep trying to cover up pain with perfectionism. Three words come through the dense thicket of failure: “Where are you?” Your God refused to give up on you. Your God looks for you when you’re lost, and your God seeks you out when you’re down, and your God calls for you when you feel cast aside.”
A blessed Advent to all.
I have just watched a small boy of about four or five weeping on the TV news. ‘They have killed my father and taken his body’ he said, trying to dry his tears with his shirt. ‘I don’t know what to do.’ This was from the Central African Republic, not Nigeria, but the same suffering, the same aggression caused by militant Islamic extremists. I wanted to weep. My little pre-Christmas evening od drinks and an expensive meal with friends suddenly seemed shallow and egotistic compared with such suffering. And you feel so helpless. Yes, I will send a cheque to a charity working in the area. And yes, in this case the French are going to send troops to help. But you wonder if this will stop unless the Muslim world rises as one to repudiate and excoriate those who undertake such horrible acts of aggression.
In a western US TEC diocese, the bishop decreed that Scripture could not be brought into “facilitated conversation” - participants could only talk about their experience. In at least one church, no one showed up for the conversation when the “facilitators” appeared. When a resolution supporting the traditional understanding of marriage was sent to convention, it was referred to a “resolutions” committee and appeared on the floor as a resolution mandating “facilitated conversation”. The Pilling Report repeats the script.
Thank you Archbishop Duncan and God bless you.
Thank you Bishop Venables and God bless you.
Thank you Canon Ashey and God bless you.
Thank you Bishop Sinclair and God bless you.
A marvelously clear “shot across the bow” by Canon Ashley. However, I fully expect his warning to fall on deaf ears. There were no sitting English bishops present in Nairobi (unlike at GAFCON I back in 2008 when two brave bishops dared to go to Jerusalem), and I seriously doubt that the English HoB will pay much attention to the implicit threat contained in the Nairobi Communique. They are far more concerned with the futile, doomed attempt to try to retain the ever-diminishing respect and rapidly-eroding good will of the majority of the English population. They long ago conceded that it’s hopeless to try to retain the former loyalty or devotion of the masses, which are united in staying away from the worship of the CoE in droves. They are engaged in a Neville Chamberlain sort of policy of trying to appease Christianity’s “cultured despisers” (Schliermacher’s famous phrase from 1799). Alas, appeasement never works.
Still, the disastrous Pilling Report, while obviously very ominous for the orthodox minority of the CoE, may well prove to be a blessing in disguise. For the first time, we have an open sign that the majority of leaders in the CoE are willing to condone, if not support, a grossly unbiblical action that has absolutely no theological justification, because the cultural pressures in favor of the gay rights agenda (and the moral relativism that underlies it) have become (in their eyes) irresistible and overwhelming.
The fact is, however, ‘twas ever so since the fundamental character of the CoE was set long ago as an established church. The rest of the Anglican world has at least begun to face up to the reality of disestablishment at different rates, according to the varying circumstances of the provinces around the globe (i.e., all provinces except England have gone through political disestablishment, while the harder and more complicated process of mentally disengaging from our former privleged status still continues, at different paces in different contexts). The Pilling Report is Exhibit 847 that it’s now time for the CoE to go through the same traumatic experience of being liberated from the shackles of an inherited system that has always subordinated the interests of the Church to the interests of national unity and the sanctifying of the political, economic, and cultural powers that be.
So therefore, I (for one) see some real silver linings in the gray clouds that now loom over the future of the CoE. Or to be more precise, it’s not the proverbial “silver” lining that I see in those ominous storm clouds on the horizon, it’s the beautiful colors of sunrise as a new day begins to dawn for Anglicanism in the motherland of England. For if the Pilling Report tells us anything, it’s that the time has come at last for the CoE to give up all pretense of retaining the support of the majority of the population, or the majority of English leaders. It’s high time to face the grim reality that England has indeed turned from being a pro-Christian country to an increasingly unChristian or even anti-Christian land. It long ago transitioned from being a majority Christian country to a minority Christian one. And for an established church, that literally changes everything.
The English HoB has to finally come to grips with the elephant in the living room that they’ve been so reluctant to admit and face. Christians are an endangered species now in England. We’ve lost control of the culture and most of the institutions of Global North society. And we won’t regain control of the culture no matter what we do. We can run Alpha all over the place and double or triple the conversion rate (may it be so!), but that still won’t change the fact that the Post-Constantinian era is here to stay. It’s back to the catacombs now for the Church everywhere in the Global North. We’re all forced to become sectarian now, even the Roman Catholics, because the culture has turned against us.
But I see this huge crisis we’re now faced with as a golden opportunity for the Church to rediscover its idenity as “called out” ones, called to be salt in a rapidly decaying society, and light in an increasingly dark culture that has utterly lost its bearings and its way. It’s high time for the leaders of the English church, especially the evangelical and Anglo-Catholic leaders still faithful to the authentic gospel, to grab the bull by the horns and undertake the radical overhaul of Anglican ecclesial structures in England that is now forced upon them by an increasingly hostile culture.
The early Christians of the first few centuries not only survived under constant harassment and occasional violent persecution before Constantine, they actually thrived, despite intense external pressure from an uncomprehending, suspicious, and even hostile cultural environment. We can do the same, if we’re willing to pay the same high price for following the Savior that they did, and that so many of our brave brothers and sisters in Christ in the Global South have been paying for a long time.
Freed from the shackles of an obsolete, counter-productive, and corrupting association with the powers that be in Englsh society, Anglicanism may just experience in our time a rebirth, a revitalization that is almost unprecedented. I fervently hope and pray that it may be so. it could even prove to be a Second Reformation, worthy of being compared to the original Protestant Reformation of the 16th century.
Wow, the soft-spoken, kindly +Greg Venables has taken the gloves off and landed a knock-out punch. He gets it and nails it.
“Evil men and imposters” within the leadership of the CoE?? “Deceiving others and being deceived?” Yeah. Right on both counts. Sad, but true.
I have been at such facilitated sessions and they are frustrating indeed.
Re: “...openly challenge everything…”
I remember the story of some guy who turned tables over when things weren’t going well in God’s house.
Doing that at a CofE facilitated gathering I admit might be borrowing a page from the TEc activists’ playbook, but hey, that is what turning the tables is all about.
Without belaboring the obvious, let me just point out relatively briefly that it’s probably easier for those of us who represent the catholic tradition withing Anglicanism to consider separating from the CoE than for those who belong to the Reformed tradition. If you’re a Protestant at heart, as the vast majority of Anglicans worldwide are (not least in the booming low church provinces of Nigeria, Uganda, Kenya, and Sudan), then the reasons for being a member of the CoE instead of Presbyterian/Reformed have a lot to do with the established nature of the CoE and its historic, privileged, and central role in English society. But if you’re the kind of Anglican that’s a “biblical catholic” at heart, then it’s probably easier to consider disentangling Anglicanism as a distinctive hybrid religious system (a Protestant-Catholic hybrid) from its historic alliance with the powers that be in England.
John Henry Newman pointed the way in the 1830s with the very first of the famous Tracts for the Times. When Parliament moved to strip the (Anglican) Church of Ireland of ten bishoprics, and Keble preached his famous sermon in July, 1833 on “National Apostasy” over that interference in church affairs, Newman posed the right question in his usual far-sighted way. If Anglicanism is to find some other basis for its authority than its backing by the State, what is that authority to be? Newman’s answer: the apostolic succession of bishops, whom he thought could be trusted to uphold the true apostolic succession, which is the passing on of apostolic doctrine.
Alas, in 1845, it became clear to Newman that the bishops of the CoE could by no means always be trusted to uphold the apostolic faith. And we are witnessing the same sad lesson in our time. Even though four of the five top bishoprics in the CoE are currently held by men that can rightly be thought to be basically orthodox, the English house of bishops as a whole are clearly willing to compromise in ways that are unwise and will only contribute to the further erosion of orthodox theology and further loss of orthopraxis in morality, because they are still desperately trying to hang on to the hopeless notion that the CoE can be “the church of the nation,” or the church of the majority of the population. They still haven’t grasped the nettle and come out of denial. England is no longer a Christian country and the vast bulk of the population aren’t authentic Christians, even though millions of them have been baptized in the CoE.
It’s time to face the grim reality that it’s back to the catacombs for the Church in the Global North. It’s time to face the fact that we are an endangered species in the western world. We’ve lost control of the mainstream culture, and we aren’t going to get our former privileged position back no matter how much better we get at evangelism.
That fundamental sea change in the culture, from a pro-Christian and majority Christian culture to an increasingly unChristian and even anti-Christian culture, literally changes everything. It demands a total overhaul of Anglicanism, redesigning everything about Prayerbook religion from the ground floor up, in order to free us from our former hapless dependence on the support of the powers that be in a world that has turned its back on Christ.
Or to restate my main and original point, when conservative evangelical Protestants consider their options in light of how hostile the CoE is becoming to them, they have less reason to stay Prayerbook Christians than Anglo-Cathplics do. Seeing Anglicanism as merely being the English form of Protestantism, there is less reason to try to stay distinctively Anglican. Why not just join the United Reform Church and be openly Calvinistic?
OTOH, if you’re the kind of “3-D” Anglican that I am, who is at least as critical of the English Reformers as I am of the Catholic Church, then there is far more motivation to try to preserve the unique blend of Protestant and Catholic elements that is the real genius of Anglicanism. Joining any plain vanilla Protestant denomination is simply not an option for us. We can never go back to being Protestant. Some of us may swim the Tiber, but we’ll never, ever go back to being Protestant. We have to have an altertive to both Rome and Geneva, to both Wittenberg and Zurich.
But it Anglicanism is interpreted as being, as I put it earlier, “Prayerbook religion,” then you can envision being a Prayerbook Christian without needing the support of the Crown, or Parliament, or Ox-bridge, or the whole inherited English system that has subordinated the interests of the Church to the interests of the State from the 1540s to this very day.
Disestablishment of Anglicanism has become a necessity as much now in England as it was in the USA, or in the rest of the UK. Freed from the corrupting influence of the political, economic, and cultural powers that be, Prayerbook religion just may finally flourish as never before. That would be a true Second Reformation, worthy of being compared with the “tragic necessity” that was the original Protestant Reformation of the 16th century.
Ex-Protestant, but not anti-Protestant
+I would point out to the CoE Synod that this is the composition”
should, of course, read:
I would point out to the CoE Synod that the composition
apologies, I was on a roll….
I would point out to the CoE Synod that this is the composition of the committee that drafted this, and the planned “facilitated conversation,” follow standard Delphi Technique practice. The committee was stacked with a bunch of revisionist bishops, and headed up by a revisionist facilitator- whose job it was to make absolutely, positively sure that the words “same sex blessing” and “gay marriage” did not slip into the report. The result was predictable, purposely ambiguous language that gives full license for same sex blessings and gay marriage under the code words “mark” and “pastoral response.” The use of ambiguous language is so that “moderate” bishops can lie to their constituencies that the report doesn’t say what it actually said.
The “facilitated conversations” will work like this:
A few tables will be set up at Synod for “hard core” conservatives. This will enable the leadership to place the most vocal opponents together so they can preach to the choir.
The vast majority of tables can then be set up with a majority of revisionists and minority of conservatives. Depending on the talent of the facilitator, these can be close numbers, as long as they are engineered to give the revisionists a slight advantage. Similar in concept to gerrymandering congressional, and I assume Parliament, districts, so that one parties voters get concentrated in a few districts, and the other party has a slight majority in many districts, allowing the party that set the thing up to maintain power long after they lose their actual majority among the overall populationa.
The facilitators, almost by definition already in the revisionist camp (ie- Communications degrees, already accept the concept that there is no such thing as right and wrong, specifically trained to bring about a compromise via Hegelian dialectic), will have, from the leadership, the predetermined answer that they are supposed to guide everyone to.
The outcome looks like this:
The few tables that are all or almost all conservative, are strongly against the proposal. But the vast majority of tables report that they favor the proposal, although most report some slight objections were raised, but the revisionists are willing to offer the “generous compromise” position, of ambiguously allowing same sex blessing and gay marriage under the facade of “marking relationships” and “pastoral response.”
You want to stop it- then stop it, but that is the plan, and that is what “facilitated conversations” and “small table groups” are all about. The facilitators are already in one camp, and the outcome is already predetermined unless it is openly derailed. You have to be willing to openly challenge the process from the very beginning, you have to be willing to openly challenge every word that comes out of the facilitators mouth, you have to be willing to be impolite, and you have to be willing to call out liars when the facilitator says things like “all at our table were committed to accepting this generous compromise in order to maintain the unity of the Church of England.”
First and foremost- you have to stop allowing the revisionists to set all the rules of the game in their favor.
I daresay that if Noah had taken a pair of rams, and no ewes, on the ark, there would not be many sheep around nowadays, no matter whether John Sentamu blessed the rams or not.
Thanks for citing that revealing comment, and for adding your own appeal for evangelicals in the CoE to start “thinking the unthinkable” and coming up with a contingency plan if they have to leave the CoE. And in all likelihood they almost certainly will, sooner or later, and probably sooner.
It’s probably presumptuous of me as an American to weigh in as an outsider to life in the UK, but I’ll venture my opinion anyway. As an American, I have a deep, abiding distreust of established churches. They always, ALWAYS, end up favoring the interests of the state and the dominant culture at the expense of the Church. The historical record is abundantly clear about that. ALL the hsitoric state churches of Europe have collapsed and withered away to almost nothing, no matter which tradition withing Christianity they represent, Catholic or Protestant, Lutheran, Reformed, or Anglican.
To me, the disastrous Pilling Report is simply Exhibit 847 that illustrates the fundamental dilemma of our time for all true Christians in the Global North. That inescapable dilemma is that we are faced with a fateful and momentous choice as to which of two mainstreams we will identify with and which we will resist. For the days when you could simultaneously be in the mainstream of the Christian tradition and the mainsteam of civil society are now past, for the two mainstreams are now increasingly opposed to each other. The philosophical and moral relativeism that now pervades and dominates the public life and culture of western societies is utterly incompatible with Christian values.
As a result, we desperately need bold Christian leaders in all the churches, including the CoE, who will play the role of Moses in Deut. 30, or Joshua at Shechem in Joshua 24, or Elijah on Mt. Carmel in 1 kings 18, challening the People of God to make a fateful and meomentous choice: Whom will you serve?. Their is a fork in the road that can no longer be avoided, and it’s a choice between life and death (Deut. 30), a choice between loyalty to the true God or the to popular idols of our increasingly neo-pagan society (Josh. 24), a choice between Yahweh and Baal (a fertility god associated with all sorts of sexual deviance and excess, 1 Kings 18).
Personally, I believe that GAFCON II’s recent decision in Nairobi to beef up the AMiE is very timely. It may even be too late for many people, for it’s going to be extremely difficult to set up enough lifeboats to save the huge numbers of people who are going to need to flee the sinking Titanic that is the CoE before it inevitably slips beneath the waves and plunges all the way to the bottom of the sea.
The handwriting is on the wall for all with the eyes to see it. And you don’t have to be a Daniel to interpre it either. The CoE is doomed, just as TEC was, and as the Canadian church was.
But Anglicanism, as a Protestant-Catholic hybrid, can and will survive the self-destruction of the CoE. The kernel can survive the loss of the institutional husk.
And freed from its captivity to the state and the now highly toxic and secularized dominatn culture of England, the best days of Prayerbook Christianity may yet be to come. That is my ardent hope.
I’ll check it out, and I agree that it’s amusing that the “Secret Archives” are hidden in plain sight. I appreciate the tip.
The spiritual corruption of TEC’s hierarchy is why I left, and will never again be a member of a hierarchical church.
Similar in spirit and tone to Barack Obama’s Proclamation of Thanksgiving.
Not half bad….. At least she mentions the name of the Season. Although it is sad that she in no way acknowledges Advent as leading to birth of Christ.
If you are interested in that sort of thing, you might enjoy the New Liturgical Movement. They do a lot of historical discussion.
It’s always amused me that the Vatican website includes a link to the “Vatican Secret Archives”. Right there on the internet, it’s clearly real “secret”.
Although I have lots of criticisms of TEC’s new calendar of proposed “saints,” I’m very happy to see the great Jesuit missionary Francis Xavier getting overdue recognition. Certainly one of the greatest missionaries of all time, he personally baptized hundreds of thousands of people during his long and dramatic ministry in Asia.
Moreover, he inspired many other young men to devote themselves to missionary service as Jesuits. I love how he went to the great French universities and challenged the best and brightest young Catholic men to “Give up your small ambitions!” and urged them to dedicate themselves to something of eternal value, bringing the gospel to unreached peoples around the world. At a time when there were virtually no Protestant missionaries yet, the Jesuits produced a remarkable number of outstanding missionaries who helped reap large harvests around the globe. But none of them were greater or more fruitful than Francis Xavier. Anglicanism has never produced his equal.
Wow. Tremendous news for all of us interested in ancient Christian manuscripts. Although there is no mention of it, among the things that I’ll be especially interested in is for some of the Vatican Library’s most valuable bliblical and liturgical documents to become available online, i.e., the famous biblical codex called “Vaticanus,” represented by the letter B in modern printed editions of the Greek OT and NT, and for the early Roman liturgical documents known as “sacramentaries” to be finally likewise available online, not least the famous “Gregorian,” “Leonine,” and above all the historic “Gelasian” sacramentaries. This is a terrific advance for scholars around the world.
FWIW, a similar project is underway that is digitalizing the vast collection of ancient Greek manuscripts at St. Catherine’s (Greek Orthodox) Monastery on the traditional site of Mount Sinai. That multi-year project is especially urgent as the precious Christian manuscripts in the library of St. Catherine’s are particularly vulnerable to destruction should Muslim militants ever attack and destroy that illustrious monastery, which is a very real danger.
“There seems to be no intrinsic reason why congregations adopting different solutions cannot work together. . . . In particular, are those who are still in CofE going to dialogue with those who have either partially or fully withdrawn from CofE, but still consider themselves Anglican?”
I can’t speak for the COE’s context, but I can’t imagine why the various groups shouldn’t continue talking with one another—the lines of communication amongst folks who have left TEC and remained in TEC are very open over here and there’s a good pipeline of intel and sharing back and forth amongst laity and some clergy.
But working together—unless it’s for an outside charity or something—has been really ineffective simply because the two groups don’t share the same *organizational* goals [other than of course the same goals that *all* Christians share, like evangelism, discipleship, etc.]—I’ve listened to too many folks in TEC talk about the meeting meltdowns that have occurred when they wanted to talk about planning for diocesan conventions [or insert any other function of being in TEC], and those who have departed TEC wanting to work with other organizational things having to do with being *out* of TEC. The organizational goals of being in different organizations just don’t entail “working together” strategically. Eventually it all sorts itself out, with the various groups dividing and working together on their own organizational goals, but not before a lot of hurt and anger got strewn around.
fyi i actually read the article…he’s no orthodox Christian and his argument doesn’t make much sense to me. like many generations since the 1960’s everything is based on ‘feelings’ not Biblical teaching.
Yeah, several years ago I recall reading a well thought out letter that Dorsey McConnell wrote to his bishop when that bishop appointed a partnered homosexual as cathedral dean. At the time, McConnell was very critical of the liberal bishop for the appointment. Now, McConnell’s views have apparently “evolved” sufficiently to let him do what he once criticized in others.
What I find troubling also is that it sounds like the “conservatives” in the TEC Pittsburgh diocese see their bishop more like a Congressional deal maker rather than as a Shepherd of the flock or Defender of the faith. Sure, McConnell still thinks that blessing same sex couples is condoning sin, but what the heck, do you think he is supposed to defend the Faith, or protect his flock from false teaching??? Heck no, his job is to reach a political agreement.
I suspect that C. S. Lewis is already far more influential than President Kennedy (considering world-wide influence) and that will only increase as the years go by.
One of the comments to the linked article well encapsulates an orthodox evangelical response. It should be considered carefully by all who take that mantle:
“As an Anglican, my take is this: The CofE is Reformed. It belongs to the evangelicals (in the narrower sense). This is seen beautifully in other parts of the world. If we leave, it will be for another Anglican church in England, retaining episcopal oversight and being truly Anglican even as the CofE dies a rapid death.
To my mind, that day becomes necessary when the fundamental basis for morality in the church is officially moved from the Bible to whims of the majority. At that point, we are finally accepting what has been going on in parts of the Church, albeit unopposed by bishops already, for some time. That is, the endorsing of immorality as moral. At that point the Church of England is constitutionally changed and ceases to be properly Anglican, Reformed or in any sense Evangelical.
However, like many of my friends in parishes, my concern is for the parishioners who come to church and are being gospelled, who will remain behind and be killed by liberal teaching. So long as we can remain in then we must. When we have to leave we need to take our people with us.
The outlook isn’t great but I don’t yet think the situation is beyond hope. Bishop Keith Sinclair has made a bold stand which many will stand behind. If we can hold off the rot long enough, the rise is happening now of a generation of conservatives in ministry. The tide can be turned but we are at a critical hour.
The writer accepts that it may be necessary for true evangelicals to leave CofE if the tide cannot be turned, albeit he intends to make every effort to prevent that. Similarly, another writer further down the page makes clear that he and his friends won’t be compromising their witness, but neither will they be leaving CofE unless their licences are withdrawn, i.e. they are forced out.
In either case, it is helpful for orthodox Anglicans to have plans in place so that they can leave fairly seamlessly, if they need to.
Return to blog homepage
Return to Mobile view (headlines)