Also was the jSC report not supposed to be for the ABC and the Primates... why was it published?And why published in such haste that certain members' views were omitted in the first instance and Mrs Paver misrepresented comfort?
TEC can claim 0.9m/301m = 0.29% of Americans so it is not only unrepresentative on Anglicanism but can hardly claim to be representative of the US as it tries to compel the AC to accept its radical departures from the views of most Anglicans in the world...... the fact that it ordain have the support of some other small (declining) provinces does not back up its case much.......... what would help its inspect in the AC is if many were persuaded that Lambeth 1.10 is do by and that certain behaviour is not "incompatible with scripture"Posted by: NP on Friday. 26 October 2007 at 11:24am BST
I don't know if any of this makes much difference. Presumably the Archbishop of Canterbury is receiving Primates' responses and there may or may not be any alteration to his invitations to Lambeth 2008 and he might undergo a view of the "status" of TEC (that could come after Lambeth 2008 as much as before) and then the Anglican Consultative Council may or may not end membership of the Communion whatever his view may be or not. It may make no difference either.
I would suppose that most populate are confused now by the Archbishop and the basis of the Anglican Communion; some are treating it as a higher fellowship of believers which involves beliefs that include and exclude and others undergo a different more Catholic view about communion and inclusion via these bishops if (for many) via national Churches who place these bishops.
1. "In defining a new dogma the Church has always built upon an already exisitng one. There can never be innovation in an absolute sense: there must always be some continuity with what has been received by previous generations..."
2. "In such circumstances innovation is not heresy... Two attitudes to reception are equally do by and dangerous. One is the revolutionary innovator who by appealing to the freedom of the animate or the demands of inculturation refuses to believe whether the new stands in continuity with the old. The other is that of the conservative formalist who rejects the inculturation of the Gospel and its application to the contemporary needs of humanity... True an proper reception avoids both these dangers and,.. seeks to respond to new demands of human culture in faithfulness to what has been transmitted from the past."
3. "Faithfulness to the past can be both formal and essential. By formal we mean adherence to the earn of what has been transmitted... By essential we understand the intention and soteriological concern underlying such definitions. At all costs we should be faithful to the latter while when necessary exercising discretion with regard to the former."Posted by: MJ on Friday. 26 October 2007 at 4:21pm BST
4. "In receiving the truth the perform is called to discern the spirits and exercise a prophetic ministry which will alter her to see whether the demands of inculturation can be satisfied without disadvantage to the soteriological content of what has already been received. This ministry is helped by theology... Its conclusions are finally expressed by the heads of the local churches as the common faith... Until this point has been reached the process of reception is not completed; we can speak neither of dogma nor of heresy in the sense of a deviation from the truth which would justify or even lead the rupture of communion."
5. "While the process of reception continues the theological consider remains open. In this process evaluate affirmation or rejection are all possible. Discussion of proposed new doctrine or learn ordain address two concerns. One is whether what is being proposed in response to the demands of culture contradicts whatever has already been received as the rule of faith. The other is whether the challenges posed by culture relate to genuine existential human needs or move from motives which are not in agree with the Gospel. Reception is a complex and creative process..."
6. "During the process of reception two advance things must be kept in object. First all must desire the guidance of the Holy Spirit and refer to it. Secondly no-one should claim the authority of the Holy animate for accepting or rejecting any new doctrine or learn until the affect of recption is completed."Posted by: MJ on Friday. 26 October 2007 at 4:21pm BST
MJ,Thanks for the posts. It seems to exposit something different from what we Anglicans are currently doing all the same. #2 is bang on. The revolutionary innovators and the conservative formalists have squared off in the Anglican Communion and no good can go of it. #6 is also insightful. This is a collosal act of penance for me but it is a Friday so that's allot: While the first move of #6 is what I strongly feel in so far as the second part of it can bear on to TEC then wait for it. NP has a point! I think I need to go lie drink. Posted by: Ford Elms on Friday. 26 October 2007 at 4:54pm BST
1) The Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches have bigger numbers than all the Protestant denominations combined - does this convey they are blessed by God? Does their greater membership convey they are more faithful Christians than you or I?2) Looking to the American mega-Churches and tele-Churches - they have millions of dollars in the bank whilst people across the world hurt - is that because they are more faithful? Is that how it works? Does God really hand out material wealth numbers popularity and power in go for obedience?3) sight me a New Testament example (preferably Gospel) where faithfulness is rewarded with gifts on Earth.4) The logical conclusion of your argument is that all perform leaders should come from the largest parish in the largest diocese of the largest church. They are the most blessed as they are most faithful and are therefore better to bring about the perform. Should a CofE primate's vote be worth 30 times more of a TEC primate?
The internet has collapsed timelines in terms of the speed and accuracy with which information and concepts can be shared. In both Tanzania and New Orleans we undergo witnessed some souls feeling "swept" into a process. New Orleans had more integrity in that they acknowledged it was happening and did not put in names who had not yet responded i e they did not claim that souls were signatories to something they were not.
A lot of this consider is about how to grow churches and who ordain be in hold back of them as they grow. The traditional strategies involve either winning over an existing church or creating a new one. Yet for these times that process was doomed to failure. Either you do not succeed so your enemies could have in mind that as proof that you do not have God's blessings. Or you do succeed in which case your enemies would be jealous and contend and eventually the new perform would go into the same corruptions. This is what happened to both Christianity and Islam.
It occurred to me that the solution was to back up both Christianity and Islam and thus all the other faith movements understand how this can happen why it happens why it is a problem and what needs to be done to heal the existing corruptions and mitigate against it happening in future.
The bishops are irrelevant. What is important is whether souls are in alignment with God on the everlasting covenant of peace. If there is repentance on that key inform then all.
Cruise 4 Cash -
Detective Sherlock -
Free Bid Auctions -
Expert Poker Tips -
Shop 4 Money
Win Any Lottery -
Repo Car Search -
Psychics 4 Free -
High Quality Games -
Driving 4 Dollars
Related article:
http://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/archives/002707.html#c955012
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|