tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post175540421210806772..comments2024-03-29T17:55:30.203+13:00Comments on Anglican Down Under: That mind of the Communion just won't go awayPeter Carrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-57672776402251315392010-04-26T07:38:20.063+12:002010-04-26T07:38:20.063+12:00And I note that you've just posted on the poin...And I note that you've just posted on the point of whether all in the Global South are compliant with Lambeth 1:10 - so, just want to thank you for that post:)Suemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03128736092253293640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-42775791615953934742010-04-26T06:53:46.472+12:002010-04-26T06:53:46.472+12:00Hi Suem
I quite agree that 1.10 as a code of compl...Hi Suem<br />I quite agree that 1.10 as a code of compliance for the Covenant is a stiff test which more may fail than some would think!<br /><br />In my view the 'mind of the Communion' indeed needs to encompass a pastoral pragmatic in which the ongoing existence of homosexuality within human societies is acknowledged.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-44802962904952589042010-04-25T22:48:31.416+12:002010-04-25T22:48:31.416+12:00I am not saying that any church leader has officia...I am not saying that any church leader has officially "supported" atrocities against LGBT Christians. Some church leaders have turned a blind eye to them and may ( perhaps unwittingly?) have said things that encourage others to think hatred and fear is justified. One example might be Akinola's statement that gays would bring about the extinction of the human race.<br /><br />The global South asserts that it wants only those "compliant with Lambeth 1:10" to sign the covenant. Lambeth 1;10 does pledge to oppose "irrational fear and hatred "( I haven't got the exact wording) of LGBT people. Given Akinola's statement about the extinction of the human race, how is he compliant with Lambeth 1:10 ayhow?!<br /><br />I'd certainly be interested to see a survey of UK churchgoers and see how many would be in favour of blessing same sex unions. I have no idea whether it would be a majority or minority. Certainly the feel "on the ground" is of a groundswell of sympathy and acceptance from most Christians. Many people have children who have come out to them, friends and colleagues who are openly gay in a way that wouldn't have happened even a decade ago. So, they know and love these people. I think the situation in the UK in another decade will certainly be of majority support, but probably not in other parts of the Communion.<br /><br />Forget the "mind of the Communion " not going away-this issues will not go away, gay people and gay rights will not go away, unless we can find a way to agree to disagree, we cannot expect the Communion to hold together.Suemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03128736092253293640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-19086068383128938212010-04-25T19:58:18.168+12:002010-04-25T19:58:18.168+12:00Hi Suem,
You raise a number of interesting points!...Hi Suem,<br />You raise a number of interesting points! <br /><br />In general terms I would certainly respect a majority viewpoint on any matter. If, on a matter of deep conviction, I was part of the minority I would need to consider my position.<br /><br />Is there any nation in which the majority viewpoint among active Christians (regular churchgoing, money contributing, participating in decisions of appointments active Christians) is in favour of blessing same sex partnerships?<br /><br />When you say "The vast majority of people in the UK, including Christians, believe that to close positions to people on the basis of their gender or sexuality is wrong - the church is acting immorally." I am left wondering about the nuances! Is this about orientation or activity? Does this apply to each and every position in the church, or would a majority (citizens? Christians? both?) accept that the church could refuse to appoint someone to a teaching position whose style of life was contrary to the teaching of the church?<br /><br />Rape is abhorrent in any country any context any time. I would hope that each member church of the Communion disavow the action (practices?) you mention. Intriguingly I have never heard any Anglican leader support such abhorrent actions, nor would I suppose any Anglican leader would say support for such actions might be context dependent. But the issues before the Communion are proving to be difficult precisely because Anglican leaders are for-and-against, and because we cannot even agree whether these issues are context dependent or not.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-69343026447758538772010-04-25T01:25:32.057+12:002010-04-25T01:25:32.057+12:00So,if on the issue of divorce and remarriage we re...So,if on the issue of divorce and remarriage we respect the majority view over scripture - where does that leave the place of scripture for someone like yourself?<br /><br />If in a few decades time the majority view across the Communions is that gay relationships are acceptable, is that view then to be respected?<br /><br />Also, how practicable is it, once the vast majority of the Christian community in a particular nation holds a particular view, to insist their national church ignores that view.<br /><br />The issue of sexuality and of women priests is an interesting one here. The vast majority of people in the UK, including Christians, believe that to close positions to people on the basis of their gender or sexuality is wrong - the church is acting immorally.<br /><br />Our national church seems more bothered about the loving committed relationship of a same sex bishop in the US than it does about the fact that lesbian women could not attend a gay friendly Anglican church in Uganda without being abducted and raped as a "punishment" - though it was described as a "cure".Suemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03128736092253293640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-1907063772076709712010-04-24T13:53:30.400+12:002010-04-24T13:53:30.400+12:00Hi Suem
(a) Yes, there are big questions about wha...Hi Suem<br />(a) Yes, there are big questions about what differences we can (and, as gracious people, should be able to) live with; and what "sins" are tolerable within Christian fellowship. I myself struggle to be satisfied with how we (apparently) accept divorced and remarried bishops but not gay bishops in stable faithful partnerships. But I think I also need to respect the majority view on such matters which, at this time, seems to be prevailing across the Communion.<br />(b) I share your concern that ACNA's recognition by the Communion is concomitant with its recognition of TEC's membership of the Communion.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-38240940738153670572010-04-24T09:34:51.618+12:002010-04-24T09:34:51.618+12:00The ACNA IS a breakaway, self styled Anglican grou...The ACNA IS a breakaway, self styled Anglican group. Now, that does not mean it cannot not be recognised, and its aspirations to that have been acknowledged. But does the ACNA itself acknowledge the parts of the body to which it objects, or does it want them expelled - but itself accepted?<br /><br />I'd be quite happy for the ACNA to be recognised as Anglican, providing it can live equitably alongside the other established members of the Communion.Suemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03128736092253293640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-47266491583314639642010-04-24T09:28:41.925+12:002010-04-24T09:28:41.925+12:00http://suem-musingaloud.blogspot.com/
I blogged o...http://suem-musingaloud.blogspot.com/<br /><br />I blogged on this- it probably won't paste live.<br /><br />You say that, <br />"The GSE statement links the mind of the Communion to the teaching of Scripture."<br /><br />And yet there have been issues in the past, such as the issue of slavery, which is supported in scripture and we have revised our views on this issue in the light of what conscience and experience tells us is just. <br /><br />There are other issues, such as the remarriage of divorcees(other than in the case of adultery), around which there exists difference of opinion - and yet scripture seems pretty clear on the matter.<br /><br />We have divorced and remarried bishops - and yet I hear no public outcry when they are consecrated and it is not a communion breaking issue. <br /><br />Are people more tolerant of those heterosexual "sins" outlawed by a narrow reading of scripture? If so, why?<br /><br />I don't see why we cannot differ.<br />If a "liberal" gay Christian can manage to walk in communion with a Christian who does not oppose the death penalty for gays (even if the gay man abhors and is deeply threatened by those views and sees them as sinful ) then why cannot a "conservative" walk in communion with those who are in relationships that that conservative considers sinful?<br /><br />Ask yourself which you would find harder and which would require the greater grace?Suemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03128736092253293640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-69743984032261857742010-04-24T07:05:54.137+12:002010-04-24T07:05:54.137+12:00Hi Suem,
I think I understand what you are saying,...Hi Suem,<br />I think I understand what you are saying, but if I do then some questions come to my mind: are there issues on which it is important for a corporate body to have or to be of 'one mind'? Can that body speak of its 'mind' when that is a majority view which sits with (a) significant minority view(s)?<br /><br />The GSE statement links the mind of the Communion to the teaching of Scripture: in this case is another view able to be accepted as the view of a conscientious minority? Or would that be trying to square the circle: holding truth and non-truth together?<br /><br />I would understand GSE4 to be expressing the last: there is one scriptural truth at stake, the mind of the Communion is in accord with that, thus those not in accord are 'violating' Scripture etc.<br /><br />Personally I would like to see the Communion work on the possibilities for living with majority/minority views on this matter. But here is a thought or two to conclude:<br /><br />(a) how well is TEC doing itself with living with a minority view? What model is it offering the Communion re majority/minority?<br /><br />(b) it could be helpful to drop talk of (un)Anglican: will those commenters on the internet who keep referring to members of ACNA as unAnglican, wannabe Anglican and the like be among the first to drop such objectionable talk?Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-87106751821242573662010-04-24T02:46:34.221+12:002010-04-24T02:46:34.221+12:00I am not sure it is at all helpful to speak of &qu...I am not sure it is at all helpful to speak of "the mind" of the Communion, because different parts of the Communion are of a different mind. It is a metaphor; metaphors only work when they are apposite and I am not sure this one is at this moment.<br /><br />The metaphor of the "mind" of the Communion does become apposite IF you are prepared to exclude or discount the views of those who disagree with you. This is clearly what the Global South want to do as they speak of,<br />"those who continue to claim the name Anglican "<br /><br />You are not allowed your own conscientious opinion! If you do not agree with us we will reject you as our Christian brothers and sisters and we will redefine you as "unanglican".<br /><br />What a wonderful witness to Christian love!Suemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03128736092253293640noreply@blogger.com