tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post3639678902697516888..comments2024-02-15T03:32:25.686-05:00Comments on Preludium, Anglican and Episcopal futures: Why the Anglican Covenant Sucks.Mark Harrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06871096746243771489noreply@blogger.comBlogger143125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-62947974033103930812011-07-09T06:56:38.318-04:002011-07-09T06:56:38.318-04:00Go, and do thou likewise, Franklin.Go, and do thou likewise, Franklin.Ms A Solemnisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-12094436859544281972011-07-08T22:53:12.579-04:002011-07-08T22:53:12.579-04:00"Be nice if we could just drop the topic"..."Be nice if we could just drop the topic"<br /><br />My God let's hope so. Whew.<br /><br />FranklinAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-14566173448461265272011-07-08T16:49:56.092-04:002011-07-08T16:49:56.092-04:00Except, Peter, that Bishop Jenkins was not being &...Except, Peter, that Bishop Jenkins was not being "ultra-strict". Cassock & surplice - as I have demonstrated, with examples, above - are the robes in which deacons and priests are ordained in the Church of England. "Diversity of robing expression" is a red herring - a non-issue. <br /><br />My returning to the subject - a subject utterly irrelevant to the topic of this thread - was motivated by Fr Carrell himself. Fr C had no need even to acknowledge that he had been mistaken in blaming Jenkins for the fact that all candidates at the ordination he attended were dressed in what he deems "low church" attire, though it would have been polite of him to do so. Instead, he devoted two short posts to condemning the bishop for being "so bound to the letter of the law of the canons" as to have imposed a uniform low church Protestant dress on the ordinands. This is simply not what happened. It was to this flogging a dead horse so as to flog a dead bishop, rather than his unwillingness to admit to an error of fact, that I objected.<br /><br />Be nice if we could just drop the topic. Neither ir nor Bishop Jenkins has anything whatever to do with this thread.Lapinbizarrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07686990585795363001noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-36438105851010828052011-07-08T13:10:37.478-04:002011-07-08T13:10:37.478-04:00I had the same inital response as you, Lapin, and ...I had the same inital response as you, Lapin, and then re-read, and saw what Peter was driving at--the apparant discrepancy of upholding the possibility of a diversity of views in one area and being ultra-strict, perhaps, in another. To me it shows that the experience of church is as important as the doctrine of church. In my ultra-conservative parish, for example, where there are only a handful of us liberals, we all of us enjoy, support, and have no controversies to speak of about how we do our very highly structured high-church liturgy.Christopher (P.)noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-43873601919677752772011-07-08T06:32:27.986-04:002011-07-08T06:32:27.986-04:00I had no intention of slagging anyone off, let alo...I had no intention of slagging anyone off, let alone the late David Jenkins. You are entitled to come to any judgement you wish about me, Lapinbizarre. I am entitled to disagree with it!Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-77774389887298681612011-07-08T03:48:00.051-04:002011-07-08T03:48:00.051-04:00I understand that your intention is to slag-off Bi...I understand that your intention is to slag-off Bishop Jenkins, regardless of the facts, which indicates pretty-clearly where you stand where honest and open discourse is concerned. Do you understand this things, Mr Carrell?Lapinbizarrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07686990585795363001noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-12369451873854891892011-07-08T02:39:07.407-04:002011-07-08T02:39:07.407-04:00I have never understood why David Jenkins could be...I have never understood why David Jenkins could be so nimble and flexible in his theology and so bound to the letter of the law of the canons, if not to the exactness of custom in the Church of England; nor why that church tolerated his and others (e.g. Cupitt) manner of theological liberality while being so rigid in its laws and their applications.<br /><br />Do you understand these things, Lapinbizarre?Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-70337753474426386242011-07-07T21:30:58.589-04:002011-07-07T21:30:58.589-04:00Did you actually read what I just posted, Mr Carre...Did you actually <i>read</i> what I just posted, Mr Carrell? The knee-jerk response suggests not.Lapinbizarrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07686990585795363001noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-60592294923569201822011-07-07T18:58:40.889-04:002011-07-07T18:58:40.889-04:00If not bound by the creeds, why be bound by custom...If not bound by the creeds, why be bound by custom or canons on clerical dress?Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-67347838383662442542011-07-07T17:51:04.719-04:002011-07-07T17:51:04.719-04:00Cassock and surplice is the normal - I believe can...Cassock and surplice is the normal - I believe canonical - dress for the ordination of deacons and priests in the Church of England, Fr Carrell. <br /><br />Scans of ordinations in the dioceses of <a href="http://www.bristol.anglican.org/wordpress/?p=846" rel="nofollow">Bristol</a>, <a href="http://www.oxford.anglican.org/the-door/news/meet-our-new-curates-6920.html" rel="nofollow">Oxford</a> and the traditionally Anglo-Catholic <a href="http://www.blackburn.anglican.org/images/News/P1000369.JPG" rel="nofollow">diocese of Blackburn</a> will confirm this.<br /><br /><i>".....no diversity of robing expression permitted by the bishop who permitted himself considerable theological diversity"</i> is a gratuitous slur on Bishop Jenkins.Lapinbizarrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07686990585795363001noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-61334291979689993412011-07-07T17:29:20.708-04:002011-07-07T17:29:20.708-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Lapinbizarrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07686990585795363001noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-87934264787205216372011-07-07T17:07:15.762-04:002011-07-07T17:07:15.762-04:00Franklin,
From where I sit in the pews, the revis...Franklin,<br /><br />From where I sit in the pews, the revised Canon IV is long overdue and will allow removal of an offending (as in conduct unbecoming) rector before the parish falls apart as could happen under the "old" Canon IV.<br /><br />I understand your well placed concern regarding the authority of bishops and the PB in particular. Until the new Canon IV has caused as much harm as the old Canon IV, I'm prepared to give it a go. After all, they can be changed if abuse should be found.<br /><br />A lot of work went into the revised canon and its revision was begun in response to the needs of parishes.Point of Orderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11197275383322593717noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-41122571926061089722011-07-07T15:36:31.829-04:002011-07-07T15:36:31.829-04:00Franklin
"So we are left with the strongly he...Franklin<br />"So we are left with the strongly held view of an individual blogger and those she can rally to her side."<br /><br />Actually, we're still left with a demonstrably unfair process that every person, regardless of their politics, should stronly object to.<br /><br />Our whole Western sense of politics and of accepting when we find ourselves on the losing side is based on our recognition that the underlying process is fair and that we simply failed to convince people of our view.<br /><br />Destroy that basis and you end up with far more problems than a Covenant.Erika Bakerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01812376497361267014noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-70525106092243102452011-07-07T15:30:46.933-04:002011-07-07T15:30:46.933-04:00Well, I am not arguing for the 39A to be 'the&...Well, I am not arguing for the 39A to be 'the' rules and regulations that primarily guide us today. Just trying to make the point that likely in any given Anglican church there are more rules than meet the eye, let alone are announced in a headline statement about how free and flexible we are.<br /><br />Yes, of course, there are agreements here and there about recognised ministries of other denominations being translateable into the context of our own member church. But some are definitely not recognised: in how many TEC dioceses would an ACNA priest be welcomed to preside in place of a vacationing rector? I daresay a lay president is not an alternative either.<br /><br />We Anglicans are odd ecclesial creatures: there are seasons in our history when we have demonstrated amazing theological breadth and intriguing canonical narrowness simultaneously. I was once present at an ordination conducted by Bishop David Jenkins of Durham (he of questioning if not denying the resurrection fame), every candidate of whom was dressed in exactly the same way (a very low church cassock and surplice, incidentally), no diversity of robing expression permitted by the bishop who permitted himself considerable theological diversity :)Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-64825722543336575872011-07-07T09:41:48.543-04:002011-07-07T09:41:48.543-04:00“If you refer to subscription to the 39 Articles, ...“If you refer to subscription to the 39 Articles, it's not part of being an Anglican in TEC.”—Christopher (P)<br /><br />Right on target, Christopher! I’ve explained to Fr. Carrell and other Anglicans down under that the Articles of Religion have never been very popular in the American Church. In the Proposed Prayer Book of 1785, the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England were dismembered and cut down to twenty in number. In the first authorized Prayer Book of 1789 they were left out altogether. The question of their reinstatement proved to be a subject of considerable debate within the American Church. <br /><br />Eventually, after much consideration and debate, a modified set of 39 Articles was included in the Prayer Book of 1801. However, as you point out, no one in the American Church—neither clergy nor lay—has even been required to subscribe to the Articles. Today, the Articles have been removed to the “historical documents” section at the end of the Prayer Book of 1979.<br /><br />The 39 Articles, whether of 1563 or 1801, are of purely historic interest—as are the 10 Articles of 1536, and the 6 Articles of 1539, the 42 Articles of 1552, the 20 Articles of 1785, etc.<br /><br />Kurt Hill<br />Brooklyn, NYKurtnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-15210727285433668582011-07-07T07:38:25.410-04:002011-07-07T07:38:25.410-04:00Peter--
Thanks for your comments--beginning to se...Peter--<br /><br />Thanks for your comments--beginning to see what you mean now.<br /><br />And to be just a bit argumentative--actually, if it were the local Lutheran pastor (ELCA), no trouble filling in on a vacation Sunday, as TEC and ELCA are in communion (We've even had a Methodist minister, irregularly, I suppose, lead Eucharist on a vacation Sunday)--the parish's rector has absolute discretion on the administration of the sacraments (although likely the Bishop would be called if he chose no longer to practice infant baptism)--and our parish prays each Sunday for the Pope as well as the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, along with the ABC and the Presiding Bishop, precisely because we consider ourselves all part of the same "thing"--not really a church, but certainly "Christianity." (Haven't cracked the non-Chalcedonian nut yet, though!) Some would have no trouble having the parish contribute to Catholic Charities, for example, although I grant you that we would likely not send funds directly to Rome. <br /><br />But I see your point, in that churches are embodied in particular forms with necessary rules and regulations. I guess I consider many of those of local and pragmatic importance only, with denominational differences here being increasingly eased through expanding ecumenical agreements that allow for mutual recognition of ministries and sacraments. But that indeed is the nub of the problem within the Communion, is it not? That is, the mutual recognition of ministries and sacraments.Christopher (P.)noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-49760825774815202042011-07-07T00:27:07.225-04:002011-07-07T00:27:07.225-04:00Again, it seems very selective as to what anything...Again, it seems very selective as to what anything NEVER goes and what anything ALWAYS goes, no matter how completely cut off from reality, decency, compassion or basic sense. <br /><br />No. <br /><br />I'm with Brian - I hope to see a new communion in which we and the ACoC and those who wish to see Christianity embrace Christ, rather than hide in a closet and play little mental gymnastics masquerading as faith, start establishing missions elsewhere. <br /><br />The fellowship here has been broken. We cannot trust the conservatives nor the bullying ABC. We have no reason to believe that we can serve Christ and your vision of doctrinal purity. <br /><br />You've simply lost our trust, and that's a much bigger issue than you seem to think.MarkBrunsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16971990948866488080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-14639841795245134862011-07-06T22:05:13.774-04:002011-07-06T22:05:13.774-04:00"Being Anglican NEVER means anything goes!&qu..."Being Anglican NEVER means anything goes!"<br /><br />Who said that it did? Usury is still sin even though everyone does it.Counterlighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14345956180434795401noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-53919811383889396232011-07-06T21:45:00.503-04:002011-07-06T21:45:00.503-04:00Hello
Counterlight: I am glad we have something i...Hello<br /><br />Counterlight: I am glad we have something in common.<br /><br />Brian: That earthquake was miles away from the main islands of NZ, so all well, thank you.<br /><br />Marshall: I think we need a new document (like a new wineskin!) BUT if we are going to sign/agree/accede/adopt/whatever inconsistently, I will be the first to agree that the signed/agreed/accedd/adopted/whatevered Covenant will not be the new document we need.<br /><br />Christopher (P.): But that Baptised-just-say-the-apostles-creed member will get short shrift from his/her priest when they ask why the local Presbyterian minister cannot fill in when the next vacation occurs, or move a motion that the parish ceases to baptise infants henceforth, or seeks to raise funds to support the papacy. Every organisation has its unwritten rules ... and if the person wished to be ordained some of those unwritten rules would turn out to be written restrictions.<br /><br />Being Anglican NEVER means anything goes!Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-45158984982987179732011-07-06T21:41:13.354-04:002011-07-06T21:41:13.354-04:00Did I say "unhinged?" I meant "rep...Did I say "unhinged?" I meant "repulsive."Counterlighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14345956180434795401noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-43772690765485406112011-07-06T21:11:54.751-04:002011-07-06T21:11:54.751-04:00Peter said: "For some reason, perhaps because...Peter said: <i>"For some reason, perhaps because we are a bit unhinged, Anglicans around the globe have also required subscription to things not in the creeds, things which distinguish us (say) from Presbyterians, Baptists, and Roman Catholics."</i><br /><br />But not TEC. Our Baptismal liturgy requires adherence to one statement of belief, the Apostles' creed, and subscription to a series of promises to live a transformed life, not so contentious in themselves. If you refer to subscription to the 39 Articles, it's not part of being an Anglican in TEC.Christopher (P.)noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-50863755454170101792011-07-06T20:27:07.753-04:002011-07-06T20:27:07.753-04:00"Instead they sought something like what AMiE...<i>"Instead they sought something like what AMiE apparently is seeking."</i> If you believe for one second, Franklin, that AMiE is seeking in reality that which it pretends to be seeking "apparently", then I have a bridge across the Golden Gate you may be interested on buying. <br /><br />At some point Rowan may remember Lear's limerick about "The Young Lady of Riga", but I doubt he'll remember it in time.Lapinbizarrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07686990585795363001noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-78297989737024047682011-07-06T18:48:31.839-04:002011-07-06T18:48:31.839-04:00'Signing statements' -- are efforts to cla...'Signing statements' -- are efforts to clarify the character of what is being adopted, as held to be consistent with the covenant's intent. <br /><br />My hunch is these will go into the hopper for the adopters to thrash out in the conciliar framework the covenant assumes.<br /><br />Some wise head on the liberal side argued that LP ought to respond to them. Not a bad idea. Better than the 'it sucks' approach.<br /><br />FAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-23520548115960395862011-07-06T18:44:45.482-04:002011-07-06T18:44:45.482-04:00BTW--what does it mean to 'respectfully recall...BTW--what does it mean to 'respectfully recall' something? Is there disrespectful recalling?<br /><br />FAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-69399820247242951732011-07-06T18:42:17.373-04:002011-07-06T18:42:17.373-04:00Marshall--correction.
Something like twelve dioc...Marshall--correction. <br /><br />Something like twelve dioceses which once were part of a larger group (Network) chose NOT to move in the ACNA direction. Instead they sought something like what AMiE apparently is seeking: the ability to give oversight to parishes seeking it, with the approval of the Diocesan, outside their own dioceses. <br /><br />It looks like AMiE is avoiding the mess that arguably was created by what became ACNA (or AMiA), though in fairness they may feel they have a better chance of getting it then anyone in the latter did in TEC. <br /><br />If some measure of differentiation is allowed (TEC says No to covenant but allows dioceses which choose to say Yes), then dioceses will feel they are able to maintain the teaching and practice they believe is Christian and Anglican Communion both. AMiE apparently is seeking the same kind of recognisibility within the CofE.<br /><br />It is unclear from what has been said publically whether the ABC may allow or consider seriously what has not been allowed in a TEC bent on Title IV type hierarchical transformation -- a transformation that may also have unintended consequences for those promoting it.<br /><br />FranklinAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com