Attending an Anglican bible study

[Contarini]

Here to learn rather than teach, so please excuse my ignorance on these things …but if those who support these innovative practices (like lesbian ordination) and those who oppose them can find ways to call the other side heretical, who gives the final word?

Just to keep the record straight, I oppose the ordination of anyone living in a sexual relationship other than [heterosexual, monogamous] marriage.

There is no “final word” in Anglicanism. In principle we function much like the Orthodox, through consensus. But it doesn’t work as well for us as for them, because we have a sharp break with tradition in our history (the Reformation) and have never really had a consensus about how to regard this (and what consensus we had was shattered by the Anglo-Catholic movement).

Edwin

 

[Soldier_X]

Just to keep the record straight, I oppose the ordination of anyone living in a sexual relationship other than [heterosexual, monogamous]

Oh yes. To keep my own record straight , I wasn’t referring to you specifically, or accusing you (or any poster) of holding to innovative beliefs. I really just meant to point out that there are vastly differing opinions on what Anglicanism is, believes, teaches, and stands for; and these differences seem greater than in some other bodies. I might be wrong about that, but it appears that way to an outsider. I understand the Low Church/Broad Church/High Church/Anglo-Catholic situation, but things I read and hear indicate that there’s quite a bit of unease and anger out there right now in all camps. Seems like much prayer is in order.

 

[Contarini]

Oh yes. To keep my own record straight , I wasn’t referring to you specifically, or accusing you (or any poster) of holding to innovative beliefs. I really just meant to point out that there are vastly differing opinions on what Anglicanism is, believes, teaches, and stands for; and these differences seem greater than in some other bodies. I might be wrong about that, but it appears that way to an outsider. I understand the Low Church/Broad Church/High Church/Anglo-Catholic situation, but things I read and hear indicate that there’s quite a bit of unease and anger out there right now in all camps. Seems like much prayer is in order.

Yes. From my perspective at least it’s becoming increasingly clear that Anglicanism is a failure, particularly the Catholic wing of Anglicanism. But of course many would disagree with me.

Edwin

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

It’s hard to assess if it is a “failure.” Some anti-Catholics see the pedophilia mass scandal as the end of Catholicism and that the verdict on Catholicism is that it’s a failure. I disagree. Some Catholics in here glean a verdict of failure for Orthodoxy because it permits contraception in some parts. And with Anglicans, some call it re-alignment, some call it the end. Anglicanism will press on. I agree with you that it’ll be more evangelical and over time more liberal in its praxis but essentially it will continue. It will get more Protestant, more orthodox in traditional morality due to the influence of the Global South, but overall it is the beginning of the end of the traditional Anglican Communion in which liberals and conservatives co-exist and pretend to be of one family.

Anglicanism is a unique animal in that it is created out of politics, literally, and is a national church originally born out of compromise. I don’t think I’ll bang the gavel declaring its demise too soon or brand it a failure, but I will say that the times are uh-changin’ in the Communion.

Yes. From my perspective at least it’s becoming increasingly clear that Anglicanism is a failure, particularly the Catholic wing of Anglicanism. But of course many would disagree with me.

Edwin

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I wanted to point out a sad reality for me that a good friend and great poster, blazerdave, has been banned either today or last night. He has become a wonderful friend to me on here and was in the process of looking into Catholicism. It’s a shame he got banned. I’ve looked over his posts and see things that he said that were not even close to as uncharitable as I have seen from other posters and I think it’s unfortunate that the moderators chose to ban him rather than warn him and work with him. He’s a very devout and religious guy with a great sense of humor. He never took himself too seriously and has a great wit. I think it’s sad that people with criticisms or different perspectives sometimes get banned so easily while some other posters can go off the hook and stay for years. I wish Dave well and he will be very much missed.

 

[GKC]

Yes. From my perspective at least it’s becoming increasingly clear that Anglicanism is a failure, particularly the Catholic wing of Anglicanism. But of course many would disagree with me.

Edwin

You may always count on one, on that subject.

GKC

Anglicanus-Catholicus

 

[Contarini]

I wanted to point out a sad reality for me that a good friend and great poster, blazerdave, has been banned either today or last night. He has become a wonderful friend to me on here and was in the process of looking into Catholicism. It’s a shame he got banned. I’ve looked over his posts and see things that he said that were not even close to as uncharitable as I have seen from other posters and I think it’s unfortunate that the moderators chose to ban him rather than warn him and work with him. He’s a very devout and religious guy with a great sense of humor. He never took himself too seriously and has a great wit. I think it’s sad that people with criticisms or different perspectives sometimes get banned so easily while some other posters can go off the hook and stay for years. I wish Dave well and he will be very much missed.

I feel especially bad about this because some of the things he said to me might have had something to do with it. We had actually made up the quarrel privately. I would protest to the moderators, but I’ve done that in the past and gotten a snippy response–it doesn’t seem to do any good.

Edwin

 

[TriuneUnity]

I feel especially bad about this because some of the things he said to me might have had something to do with it. We had actually made up the quarrel privately. I would protest to the moderators, but I’ve done that in the past and gotten a snippy response–it doesn’t seem to do any good.

Edwin

Nah…don’t feel bad man. It didn’t have anything to do with you. The last time I talked to him was yesterday afternoon. In looking over his last few posts before he was banned, it had to do with those people who come here about a certain subject I won’t name, and his replies to them, I believe.

 

[GKC]

I wanted to point out a sad reality for me that a good friend and great poster, blazerdave, has been banned either today or last night. He has become a wonderful friend to me on here and was in the process of looking into Catholicism. It’s a shame he got banned. I’ve looked over his posts and see things that he said that were not even close to as uncharitable as I have seen from other posters and I think it’s unfortunate that the moderators chose to ban him rather than warn him and work with him. He’s a very devout and religious guy with a great sense of humor. He never took himself too seriously and has a great wit. I think it’s sad that people with criticisms or different perspectives sometimes get banned so easily while some other posters can go off the hook and stay for years. I wish Dave well and he will be very much missed.

That is odd. I saw nothing in his posts to warrant that. Nor in any thread he was in, in general.

GKC

 

[Contarini]

It’s hard to assess if it is a “failure.” Some anti-Catholics see the pedophilia mass scandal as the end of Catholicism and that the verdict on Catholicism is that it’s a failure. I disagree. Some Catholics in here glean a verdict of failure for Orthodoxy because it permits contraception in some parts. And with Anglicans, some call it re-alignment, some call it the end. Anglicanism will press on. I agree with you that it’ll be more evangelical and over time more liberal in its praxis but essentially it will continue. It will get more Protestant, more orthodox in traditional morality due to the influence of the Global South, but overall it is the beginning of the end of the traditional Anglican Communion in which liberals and conservatives co-exist and pretend to be of one family.

Anglicanism is a unique animal in that it is created out of politics, literally, and is a national church originally born out of compromise. I don’t think I’ll bang the gavel declaring its demise too soon or brand it a failure, but I will say that the times are uh-changin’ in the Communion.

I agree with everything you say. My judgment that it’s a “failure” comes from my own view of what Anglicanism ought to be. It looks increasingly as if there will be two major streams of Anglicanism in the future: a fairly small liberal branch in the West, which in my opinion will never go away entirely because it provides a niche for people who want some connection to tradition but are uncomfortable with the more conservative alternatives, and a much larger evangelical movement which will become increasingly indistinguishable from other forms of Protestantism, especially as many other Protestants turn toward liturgy and tradition as well. There may be great things in store for this version of Anglicanism. If N. T. Wright is representative of where it is going (and he may well be), then I think its future is bright. But what I do not find in that Anglicanism is the aching consciousness that something was tragically lost in the Reformation and needs to be recovered. Wright can quite blithely demolish the central claim of the Reformation while insisting that he is doing no such thing and that he’s quite confident the Catholic tradition is wrong on other grounds. There is a bubbly triumphalism in evangelical Anglicanism which I find personally repellent and theologically disastrous. Their blithe willingness to disregard historic Catholic polity does not augur well for their contributions to Christian unity.

I used to think differently, even just a few years ago. But as I have gotten to know more folks affiliated with the ACNA, my hopes have sunk. And the Anglican Ordinariates may be the last straw, since they will filter off just enough Anglo-Catholics to make the Catholic wing of Anglicanism ineffective.

Of course there will remain Anglo-Catholics like GKC, and no Christian tradition that has him as a member will ever be unworthy of respect. But I see the “Continuing” version of Anglo-Catholicism, when you subtract the folks who will join the Ordinariates, as being quite content to be what and who they are without contributing significantly to healing the breaches in the broader Church.

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[GKC]

I agree with everything you say. My judgment that it’s a “failure” comes from my own view of what Anglicanism ought to be. It looks increasingly as if there will be two major streams of Anglicanism in the future: a fairly small liberal branch in the West, which in my opinion will never go away entirely because it provides a niche for people who want some connection to tradition but are uncomfortable with the more conservative alternatives, and a much larger evangelical movement which will become increasingly indistinguishable from other forms of Protestantism, especially as many other Protestants turn toward liturgy and tradition as well. There may be great things in store for this version of Anglicanism. If N. T. Wright is representative of where it is going (and he may well be), then I think its future is bright. But what I do not find in that Anglicanism is the aching consciousness that something was tragically lost in the Reformation and needs to be recovered. Wright can quite blithely demolish the central claim of the Reformation while insisting that he is doing no such thing and that he’s quite confident the Catholic tradition is wrong on other grounds. There is a bubbly triumphalism in evangelical Anglicanism which I find personally repellent and theologically disastrous. Their blithe willingness to disregard historic Catholic polity does not augur well for their contributions to Christian unity.

I used to think differently, even just a few years ago. But as I have gotten to know more folks affiliated with the ACNA, my hopes have sunk. And the Anglican Ordinariates may be the last straw, since they will filter off just enough Anglo-Catholics to make the Catholic wing of Anglicanism ineffective.

Of course there will remain Anglo-Catholics like GKC, and no Christian tradition that has him as a member will ever be unworthy of respect. But I see the “Continuing” version of Anglo-Catholicism, when you subtract the folks who will join the Ordinariates, as being quite content to be what and who they are without contributing significantly to healing the breaches in the broader Church.

In Christ,

Edwin

Well, I’d do what I could.

And thanks.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I agree. The ACNA is largely evangelical and if you talk to a lot of people who are bailing on ACNA it is because they feel that “too many Calvary-Chapel-type yahoos” as I had it put to me one time by a renegade ACNA priest going to Catholicism, are moving in with little or no appreciation of historic catholicity. They come from an evangelical background more akin to Baptists or other groups that aren’t well-grounded in the Councils, the Fathers, and the ancient Church polity. The Continuing Anglicans seem to be a dying breed, made up of mostly folks aged 50 and up with low attendance from the youth. The ACNA groups that are still a touch Anglo-Catholic are mostly in Iker’s turf if I’m not mistaken, and I know Iker is fed up with some of Duncan’s women’s ordination views and how many women he continues to ordain. He made a comment to David Virtue not too long ago that made it clear his options are still open.

The “Global South” is actually starting to ordain more women as well, a bad sign for ecumenical talks with Orthodoxy and Catholicism and other Anglo-Catholics with traditional-mindedness. The talk with Metropolitan Jonah was mostly window-dressing as Bishop Schofield is a lifelong friend of Jonah’s.

So I think Anglicanism is going in all directions and is getting more drama-laden and less influential by the day.

The Elizabethan Compromise started a seed and it has grown. But it’s morphing into a series of separate pods that have behaved more like Venus Fly Traps. I’ve been watching Anglicanism for years, fascinated by it (why, I don’t know?) and I have a love for it (again, why? ), and it’ll always be a part of me I think, but I do have to admit that after all these years I still cannot exactly say what Anglicanism really is. And perhaps that is why it’s in this crazy flux and civil war. A great historical what-if would’ve been what if the Church of England had gone in the direction of a confessional faith like Lutherans and would’ve held fast to the 39 Articles or to the Anglo-Catholic route without embracing both…grabbing onto a confessional theology that had order to it. I always wonder what it would’ve looked like…

I agree with everything you say. My judgment that it’s a “failure” comes from my own view of what Anglicanism ought to be. It looks increasingly as if there will be two major streams of Anglicanism in the future: a fairly small liberal branch in the West, which in my opinion will never go away entirely because it provides a niche for people who want some connection to tradition but are uncomfortable with the more conservative alternatives, and a much larger evangelical movement which will become increasingly indistinguishable from other forms of Protestantism, especially as many other Protestants turn toward liturgy and tradition as well. There may be great things in store for this version of Anglicanism. If N. T. Wright is representative of where it is going (and he may well be), then I think its future is bright. But what I do not find in that Anglicanism is the aching consciousness that something was tragically lost in the Reformation and needs to be recovered. Wright can quite blithely demolish the central claim of the Reformation while insisting that he is doing no such thing and that he’s quite confident the Catholic tradition is wrong on other grounds. There is a bubbly triumphalism in evangelical Anglicanism which I find personally repellent and theologically disastrous. Their blithe willingness to disregard historic Catholic polity does not augur well for their contributions to Christian unity.

I used to think differently, even just a few years ago. But as I have gotten to know more folks affiliated with the ACNA, my hopes have sunk. And the Anglican Ordinariates may be the last straw, since they will filter off just enough Anglo-Catholics to make the Catholic wing of Anglicanism ineffective.

Of course there will remain Anglo-Catholics like GKC, and no Christian tradition that has him as a member will ever be unworthy of respect. But I see the “Continuing” version of Anglo-Catholicism, when you subtract the folks who will join the Ordinariates, as being quite content to be what and who they are without contributing significantly to healing the breaches in the broader Church.

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[DharmaBum]

I just want to say that I am thoroughly enjoying this discussion. I tend to lean more in the direction of GKC’s views, but I have learned a great deal from Contarini’s posts (as I have followed them for quite some time). Thank you all

 

[GKC]

I just want to say that I am thoroughly enjoying this discussion. I tend to lean more in the direction of GKC’s views, but I have learned a great deal from Contarini’s posts (as I have followed them for quite some time). Thank you all

Contarini has a good deal to teach.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

HI Edwin,
I initially thought the exchange between you, Dave, and GKC had something to do with it. But I don’t think so at this point. There are these Falun Gong trolls who come on CAF and Dave was being goofy with them and for some reason he instantly got banned? I agree that the mods made a poor choice. I’ve seen people go off the hook in here and get away with it. Most of us have said things at times that were “out there” or in the heat of the moment that far outdid Dave’s silly chiding of some trolls! Like Triune said, I don’t think it was you. I have spoken with Dave outside of CAF in emails and he was flaburgasted and blown-away that he was banned. He didn’t see that coming?..

I feel especially bad about this because some of the things he said to me might have had something to do with it. We had actually made up the quarrel privately. I would protest to the moderators, but I’ve done that in the past and gotten a snippy response–it doesn’t seem to do any good.

Edwin

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Alright, alright, now that the mutual admiration society is over, can we move on here?

Contarini has a good deal to teach.

GKC

 

[GKC]

Alright, alright, now that the mutual admiration society is over, can we move on here?

Until the next time, sure.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Until the next time, sure.

GKC