Forgive another bite at the cherry.
I forgot to add to the list of those wheeled in to intimidate us was the POTUS.
Since the referendum voices have been heard in the EU leadership saying that British exit shows there is a problem in the EU and the only way to solve it is ... by further renunciations of state sovereignty and making EU governance even more centralised. Which would only further alienate the Western European populace. Like the Bourbons after the French revolution, it can be said that th Eurocratic elite have learned nothing and forgotten nothing.
There is much here that is thought-provoking, although I lost his train of argument where he began saying that the Catholic Church alone can create a space of hospitality for other religions in France today. I do not think he showed this nor that I agree. However, it was at points like someone reading my secret thoughts. I found myself wondering recently about the whole concept of human rights, which has done so much to free people and yet has also dissolved ancient ties that bind us together, at the same time eroding any common ethic. The liberal position is that we must agree to differ and (this is the crucial part) that the state mediates between any differences. But the state in a climate that prizes human rights above all else will always legislate for the individual. Pierre Manent gives us further reason to think along these lines by arguing there that there is now nothing between the individual and the state, with all real associations being depreciated and undermined.
Who knows what was in the minds of the 17+ million voters who chose here in the UK to leave the EU? I doubt if they would have articulated it the way it is expressed in this article. But I suspect that deep inside they shared the same fears and frustrations described here, the same feeling that things fall apart, the centre cannot hold and that our gilded elites see no problem in this. Incidentally, the institutional pressure on us to vote otherwise was huge - the Treasury, the BBC, the Prime Minister, the official position of the political parties, many, perhaps most of the leading economists, etc. Without this bias, the majority would have been even larger. Or so I think.
When Europe gave up its Christian basis, it set itself adrift in a turbulent sea. The attack on the church in France makes very clear, to those who will look, the foundational anti-Christian nature of Islam. Where does Europe, and where do Europeans, stand with relation to Christ?
What a tragedy that the division of Sudan not only opened the way for the greater persecution of Christians in the Muslim north but has brought South Sudan to this juncture.
Even were one to assume that most of those involved in the fighting were something other than the roughly 60 percent (according to Pew) identifying as Christians, it’s still a sobering reminder of what the Global South is called to overcome.
The professors designed those courses so they wouldn’t have to teach them and still get paid. They knew no one would show up.
The victors get to write the history, and the losers’ words will not be included.
May she rest in peace.
Glory to God for small victories.
The translation while entertaining was wholly unnecessary.
Ad Orientem might not be aware of one of the peculiarities of Canadian canon law, as a national canon needs to be received by diocesan synods before it applies to an individual diocese. If a bishop resigns, he faces the possibility of a successor who will quite happily encourage their synod to receive the revised XXI in three years.
As far as slugging is concerned, it’s not an aspect of Canadian decision-making (with the exception of Presbyterian life of the 1800s)—our cultural inclinations usually over-ride other considerations.
How does Galli square each of us being guilty of the sins of us all (sounds like he never heard of that Jesus guy) with Ezekiel Chapter 18, summed up by:
Ezekiel 18:20 The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son’s iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.
Just more liberal groupthink and moral equivocation from Galli.
I may not have my remembrance correct, but I seem to remember hearing him speak at Mere Anglicanism, and we all chuckled when he said that when he received the invitation to speak, he knew that the colonies “had forgiven us”.
Sorry, Father Harmon—Like I said, it was my bad eyesight, not your headline. You are, however, probably aware of “Johnson’s First Law of Episcopal Thermodynamics”—one interpretation of which could be that that which seems preposterous today becomes reality tomorrow.
I apologize #1 for any confusion, the software limits the length of headlines and it makes some of them hard to write well. I have edited it to be more clear now.
“This election raises significant concerns and questions of church polity and unity.” This is a perfect time for dialogue or indaba.
I have to get my glasses checked. I did a double-take when I initially thought the headline was “bishop who is a woman married to 2 other women.” I was thinking that the slippery slope is happening even faster than I thought.
What are we confused about?
What an interesting report. Intriguing to see the comments section too.
At this point there seems no substantive difference between the Liberal and Anglo-Catholics. Does Affirming Forwardness exist yet?
The fight for orthodoxy now rests with the evangelicals and I suspect they just don’t have the numbers to win votes in the medium term. As in the reported shared conversations, what the church has taught from Jesus until, well, now, will become one option in a smorgasbord of local options. Then it’ll be derided. Then it’ll be banned.
I’d be more impressed if they actually did something besides issue yet another in the long series of bland statements from Anglican bishops confronted with clear heresy. St. Athanasius did not react this way. Nor did Maximus the Confessor. Maybe the example of St. Nicholas who purportedly slugged Arius might be a bridge too far for the famously polite and reserved Anglican clergy.
But seriously, how about the principled resignation? Have we fallen so far that men of the cloth value their pay check over their duty to uphold and defend Christian orthodoxy?
The conclusion was foregone. The cOC was just trying to belatedly keep up with the times (http://www.kendallharmon.net/t19/index.php/t19/article/65593/) as the “argumentation” demonstrates.
So, how quickly does Hiltz do a Schori and defrock ‘em as examples?
What are faithful Anglicans in Canada going to do now?
The ACNA was founded by Americans and Canadians together back in 2009, so many (most?) won’t be directly affected by the decision. For those who remained in the old structure… I guess they have some decisions to make.
Sadly, this take me back to the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America’s 2009 Churchwide Assembly, where the unfortunate social statement Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust received the exact 2/3rds vote needed for passage. Indeed, every vote matters.
I would argue that many American churches are already trying to be all things to all people in an effort to unite the church with the world around it. It may be one of the reasons that Christianity, the institutional version, is so roundly ignored by the society he seeks to change. A look at political polling from earlier this year shows clear evidence that nominal Evangelicals, and I would say you could extend that to nominal Christians of many ilk, really don’t cling to the cross despite of or in spite of what they may have heard from a pulpit in their lifetimes.
Should the churches preach character, and personal responsibility for actions and omissions, through the Gospel? Of course. But I don’t think that’s what is being asked of the church.
What are faithful Anglicans in Canada going to do now?
I should have checked my email before assuming that the propaganda dept had not already sent out an announcement
So it will be interesting to see if ACNS prints a correction tomorrow, or if they just leave up the incorrect story, hoping the GS doesn’t get word…
oops, should read “bishops of the large dioceses...” in the second section above.
Glad that’s over, actually. With the way it was going, SSM was defeated, but the primate and majority of bishops were going to openly defy their own canons- while at the same time proclaiming to the Anglican Communion that nothing had changed.
Granted, there will have to be a second reading, but based on the statements of the various bishops, gay marriage is the law in the vast majority of parishes, because it was the bishops of the large who have abandoned the communion of the Church.
Now the GS and other faithful followers of Christ within the Communion have a stark reality before them, and Mr Hiltz no longer has the veil of his canons to hide behind. By this act, the ACoC has broken communion with the majority of the Anglican Communion, and violated the Primates’ Agreement.
Wonder if the propaganda arm at Lambeth palace got the word before they hit the hay? Would be terribly embarrassing if tomorrow morning someone issued the press release they spent all day writing, about the rejection of gay marriage by the Canadians.
Well, at least everyone will know how the General Secretary voted, eh? Perhaps lionization for future generations will be in order, if there are any future generations.
What a huge turn of events. Every vote matters.
Googling “david brooks nyt national ruin” got me to the article quickly.
“It is breaking my heart that there are people who see…”
Perhaps it would be edifying to investigate how they came to this conclusion.
“While no clergy will be required to officiate…”
This simply appears to be self-righteous preening. Bp Chapman’s carefree departure from biblical Christianity renders his oversight and communion a severe challenge, if not intolerable, for any hapless faithful clergy that happen to remain.
Clicking on “read it all” simply brings the truncated post back.
Let the bullying begin in earnest: http://www.timescolonist.com/god-did-not-create-another-adam-anglicans-vote-down-same-sex-marriage-1.2298929 . Bishops overriding the vote to force it on their dioceses, hyperventilating agents insisting on a coming rise in suicides occasioned by the “great refusal” and exaggerated vapors by alleged trans observers over the horror of it all. Yes, the real bullying will begin,
Rules? Who needs rules?
I note that the amendment has removed all the language that would have allowed individual parishes to “opt out,” and under this, as long as the diocesan bishop approves (and most are on record at this point), the local parish has little to say about it. Nor is there a conscience clause, as such, within the revised canon.
Unfortunately, Mr. Hiltz has apparently done the work he set out to do after the HoB meeting earlier this year, and is fairly confident that he has the votes in his back pocket from enough bishops to pass this thing. If he did not, he would have not allowed it to come to the floor, which is what he implied he would do when it failed before the bishops earlier this year.
The prevarication to follow from Welby is by now well rehearsed.
#2, I’m guessing the “liberal wing” is TEC, and the other is the ACNA. TEC leaders won’t be happy with that statement of equivalence.
I was wondering the same thing—was there a specific grant from TEC itself, or was this funded by Trinity Wall Street or another church?
The New Testament is clear that sexual purity is a core requirement of the Christian life.
“But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people. Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving. For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person—such a person is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.” Ephesians 5:3-5
” the liberal wing of the Anglican Church in the USA” would be what institution in the mind of the author, I wonder? Those of us in the hinterlands know it as TEc, and I have no doubt that it would have funded the undermining of doctrine in the cOE, if it could afford it, but I do think it is a bit cash strapped what with litigation funding.
I am still smiling and wondering if the author of this article believes in a non-liberal wing of the Anglican Church in the USA?! - in TEc, I mean.
I would be interested to know if conservatives did refuse to play this “shared conversation” game, and also if the American funding charge is true.
The die is cast. Everyone knows that the facilitated conversations will go nowhere. The only purpose is to be able to say, “Look, we tried”. “Good disagreement” can only mean that the progressive ball has moved further down the field.
This was quoted in the sermon for Bishop Salmon’s Memorial service.
This should be investigated as possible domestic terrorism. Shooter is said to have belonged to this group. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Black_Panther_Party
An interesting read. I remember following Father Chori Seraiah’s own blog for awhile as he documented his move into the Catholic Church and spent some time in Iowa at an Anglican parish that eventually chose to stay where it was. Nice to see Father Seraiah has landed in the Ordinariate.
Return to blog homepage
Return to Mobile view (headlines)