tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post6059217409639076845..comments2024-03-29T17:55:30.203+13:00Comments on Anglican Down Under: Good disagreement or good discrimination? [Updated]Peter Carrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comBlogger56125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-39876008039273631082017-03-21T07:29:14.360+13:002017-03-21T07:29:14.360+13:00"GAFCON Primates have taken upon themselves t...<br />"GAFCON Primates have taken upon themselves the 'cloak of righteousness', when even Jesus, addressed by a bystander as "Good MKaster', was quick to say "Who are you calling good, there is One Alone who is good", indicating that not even Jesus, in his human form, could claim goodness."<br /><br />Why of course, he wasn't sinless! As the Episcopal Bishop of Washington opined some years back, Jesus knew himself to be a sinner in need to God's mercy. He needed a sinless Saviour like, er .... his mother, perhaps? Well, that's one kind of (medieval) Catholic theology, I guess.<br />Ron, do you never run out of rope?BrianR https://www.blogger.com/profile/11084982458935874569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-73527297403279383732017-03-20T21:52:51.761+13:002017-03-20T21:52:51.761+13:00'Holy Week Ceremonies:
Christ our Passover is...'Holy Week Ceremonies:<br /><br />Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us; therefore let us keep the Feast -<br />Not with the old leaven of Malice and Wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of Sincerity and Truth."<br /><br />Trouble is, our judgement of our peers can sometimes be attributable to the 'old leaven'; wherein we are disposed to take upon ourselves the prerogative of God - judging the sins of other rather than reflecting upon our own sins.<br /><br />GAFCON Primates have taken upon themselves the 'cloak of righteousness', when even Jesus, addressed by a bystander as "Good MKaster', was quick to say "Who are you calling good, there is One Alone who is good", indicating that not even Jesus, in his human form, could claim goodness.<br /><br />If this was so for Jesus, on what ground can we stand that allows us to judge the righteousness of others?<br /><br />Jesus spoke pretty clearly on this matter of self-righteousness in his story about the Publican and the Pharisee.<br /><br />Jesu, Mercy; Mary, Pray! <br /><br />Father Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17062632692873621258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-36040989211196865122017-03-20T19:30:45.487+13:002017-03-20T19:30:45.487+13:00I have no doubt that Mike Ovey knows more about Go...I have no doubt that Mike Ovey knows more about God's grace now than he did before his (humanly speaking) untimely death in January. This was the central burden of Peter Jensen's words in the Thanksgiving video from All Souls - that Ovey was a sinner saved by the blood of Christ and that he taught throughout his ministry that the saving grace of Christ was received only through repentance and faith: 'Repent and believe the gospel'. I have never heard this basic truth expressed so clearly in a funeral or thanksgiving - including those I've taken myself. Ovey would have agreed wholeheartedly with Packer's definition:<br />'Repentance means turning from as much of your sin as you understanding toward obeying God's will as much as you understand" - the operative words being 'as much as you understand': this is never meant to stand still but is known through an ever deeper engagement with the Scriptures. Ovey's primary charge was that the understanding was woefully and wilfully limited and the Church's public voice was mediocre and ineffectual. His analytical mind was trained first in drafting parliamentary legislation and then in patristic theology exploring the humanity and suffering of Christ. His 2013 words about cheap grace, narcissism and ineffectual 'modernisation' of the Church seemed to speak right into this cultural moment.<br />The whole point about God's grace is that it *is grace: it is given to undeserving sinners (who are so-defined by God's word, not their own) and is received by repentance (from sin) and faith (toward Christ the sin-bearer pierced for our transgressions). <br />BrianR https://www.blogger.com/profile/11084982458935874569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-25434462471627024182017-03-20T16:48:49.345+13:002017-03-20T16:48:49.345+13:00Whoops, Ron, I meant to say, "It is not at al...Whoops, Ron, I meant to say, "It is not at all clear to me that we can proudly/loudly proclaim that the grace of God has NOT deserted church or world."Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-48676153323679753132017-03-20T16:25:18.615+13:002017-03-20T16:25:18.615+13:00"It is not at all clear to me that we can pro..."It is not at all clear to me that we can proudly/loudly proclaim that the grace of God has deserted church or world." - Dr. Peter Carrell -<br /><br />Precisely, Peter. That was the burden of my comment you protest against.Father Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17062632692873621258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-85911438593199188752017-03-20T15:54:08.105+13:002017-03-20T15:54:08.105+13:00Hi Ron
I find your comment quite disagreeable beca...Hi Ron<br />I find your comment quite disagreeable because it is incredibly presumptuous on your part, namely that you know more about the grace of God than a brother in Christ.<br />It is not at all clear to me that we can proudly/loudly proclaim that the grace of God has deserted church or world. There are various ways in which the church is in a parlous state (cf declining attendance and participation) and the world is going to hell in a handbasket (cf electing Trump who is not only a clown but a buffoon yet in charge of the mightiest war machine known to humankind ever.<br />It may well be that God's grace is merely present among us by refusing to smite us and simply letting us get on with making decisions and experiencing the consequences.<br />I am publishing your comment despite its level of disagreeability for this and only this reading: it may also be presumptuous of Mike Ovey to have touted the assessment that God's grace has deserted the church.<br />It is not so much that God's grace is inexhaustible, it is that God's grace moves in mysterious ways his wonders to perform and far be it from any of us to declare that grace is absent or present!Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-26533230824210672242017-03-20T15:37:35.096+13:002017-03-20T15:37:35.096+13:00Well, presumably Mike Ovey may, by now, have disco...Well, presumably Mike Ovey may, by now, have discovered a wee bit more about God's inexhaustible love, than he knew when he preached (in Brian Kelly's proffered video of his sermon) to like-minded con/evo people at Peter Jensen's GAFCON II Meeting. His talk of God's grace having deserted the Church and world of the West was both sacrilegious and presumptuous in the extreme. May God have mercy on his soul!Father Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17062632692873621258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-48241909631890579242017-03-20T11:54:54.991+13:002017-03-20T11:54:54.991+13:00Thank you for this again Brian. I have already pos... Thank you for this again Brian. I have already posted this link on a subsequent thread, Lambeth 2020, but it also pertains to your latest couple of comments :<br /><br />http://snip.ly/80izf?utm_source=notifications&utm_medium=email&utm_content=faithlife-digest&utm_campaign=faithlife#https://mereorthodoxy.com/theologians-arguing-benedict-option-35-years-ago/<br /><br />Bryden Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15619512328964399016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-62261927256167325842017-03-20T11:09:15.459+13:002017-03-20T11:09:15.459+13:00This is his lecture at Gafcon II which Peter Jense...This is his lecture at Gafcon II which Peter Jensen referred to, on Repentance, Cheap Grace and Narcissism, culminating in a brief discussion of Lux Mundi - and tying this to the theological weakness and cultural accommodation that Western Anglicanism makes - and continues to have no impact on its culture despite its insistent 'modernisation'. The discussion of Twenge and Campbell on 'Narcissism' is very interesting because it is historically realted to Kant's famous essay 'Was ist Aufklaerung? 'What is Enlightenment?' - ouchy for Otago graduates who were tutored under the proud motto 'Sapere Aude'!<br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFGSR_D2fyQBrianR https://www.blogger.com/profile/11084982458935874569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-34513615764414140162017-03-20T10:18:18.093+13:002017-03-20T10:18:18.093+13:00Sad to hear Michael Ovey has died so soon. He was ...Sad to hear Michael Ovey has died so soon. He was pioneering a wholesome wave of another generation of evangelical scholars who were dogmaticians rather than simply exegetes. For in order to have a due theological exegesis, there has to be a solid interaction among systematic theologians, historical ones, and naturally NT scholars. All of which then may be passed through both a missiological lense and a spiritual formational one. Or perhaps (sic) those twin lenses are the way to read the others ...?!Bryden Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15619512328964399016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-60274216616333097282017-03-20T04:05:03.904+13:002017-03-20T04:05:03.904+13:00Bryden, your comments above at 10.31 pm and passim...Bryden, your comments above at 10.31 pm and passim about the lamentable standard of theological formation in parishes find echoes in the addresses by Daniel Strange, acting principal of Oak Hill Lodon (about 40 mins in on the video) and Peter Jensen (about 1 hour in) at the thanksgiving service for the life of Michael Ovey, principal of Oak Hill and patristic theologian, whose vision for theological education is far more demanding than anything required in the C of E training courses of today. The critics mince no words, calling these courses shallow and amateurish, and if that's how the ministers are 'trained', who can blame the laity for knowing no better? <br />https://vimeo.com/208636800BrianR https://www.blogger.com/profile/11084982458935874569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-58398410136713732302017-03-17T09:58:27.023+13:002017-03-17T09:58:27.023+13:00"Sorry Peter, but Bowman is just trying to pu..."Sorry Peter, but Bowman is just trying to put a gloss on the views of liberals in England which simply isn't there." --MichaelA<br /><br />Actually, Peter, I was describing views posted at the time by self-described evangelicals on Fulcrum. My own comments there generally defended Gerald Bray's proposal for peculiar jurisdictions, which I continue to find valuable. <br /><br />Bowman Walton<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-89145104733498486612017-03-17T07:19:30.764+13:002017-03-17T07:19:30.764+13:00Aha Michael: Kent!
In which case is he a man of Ke...Aha Michael: Kent!<br />In which case is he a man of Kent, or a Kentish man? The locals put much store on the distinction.Bryden Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15619512328964399016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-80553694650390972632017-03-16T23:13:18.287+13:002017-03-16T23:13:18.287+13:00Hi Peter, what you are describing is a change in h...Hi Peter, what you are describing is a change in how things are done in the Church of England. In the controversies of yesteryear, (4) almost never happened. But now it is going to happen a lot, and not because of the beliefs of Philip North, which are hardly unreasonable. Rather, it will happen increasingly because this is standard tactics by liberals when they gain power in a church. <br /><br />This is exactly what we saw happen in TEC with the depositions of hundreds of clergy, congregations expelled from buildings etc. Its not because of disagreement per se - that has always existed. It is because liberals, once they are in power, have different values to everyone else. <br /><br />It is not the fact of disagreement that is relevant here, but the means which one faction was prepared to go to, in order to get their own way, and will be even more prepared to do so in future. Hence why conservative evangelicals and anglo-catholics in England will need to learn to change their attitude on a number of issues. MichaelAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-17505085327805783482017-03-16T23:03:20.858+13:002017-03-16T23:03:20.858+13:00Hi Fr Ron, now its my turn to be confused. Who is...Hi Fr Ron, now its my turn to be confused. Who is "Gavin Ashendon"? ;o)<br /><br />Ashenden is a common name in Kent, Jutish in origin, I suspect. <br /><br />Re your last paragraph, a priest of God's church should not even need to ask whether God loves Muslims, although I suppose nothing surprises me any more. Please read John Chapter 3, particularly verse 16, then we can discuss further if you like. MichaelAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-35007383148303007402017-03-16T19:08:35.063+13:002017-03-16T19:08:35.063+13:00Hi Michael
"unifying reception" is a bit...Hi Michael<br />"unifying reception" is a bit inelegant and doesn't do justice to the nature of episcopal reception. So, here goes:<br />(1) few bishops (at least at the point of being announced to Dioceses) receive universal applause and affirmation. <br />(2) most bishops survive and flourish following their initial reception and their good work wins over their initial detractors etc<br />(3) some bishops always have critics and those dissatisfied with their leadership, but generally in most such situations "people get on with it."<br />No doubt archbishops announcing appointments hope for (2) and cross their fingers when they think it might be a (3).<br />But there is a (4) where circumstances (such as a strikingly inapposite theological position such as Philip North holds) make it more predictable that (2) is not going to happen and (3) is a barely credible prediction of the best imagined outcome.<br />Fortunately this rarely happens (in my experience/knowledge) re bishops - much more likely to happen re appointments of vicars.<br />So, yes, in recent years (and before that) there have been awkward/difficult/troubling appointments (one might think of David Jenkins going to Durham in the 1980s) but they have been either (2) or (3) situations.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-76013025083166825452017-03-16T19:03:04.460+13:002017-03-16T19:03:04.460+13:00Congratulations, Ron. Almost every sentence of you...Congratulations, Ron. Almost every sentence of your last post is factually wrong. Now there's consistency!BrianR https://www.blogger.com/profile/11084982458935874569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-14230035519884101482017-03-16T17:21:53.017+13:002017-03-16T17:21:53.017+13:00I see now, Micahel A.
Gavin Ashendon resigned (qu...I see now, Micahel A.<br /><br />Gavin Ashendon resigned (quite properly) from his former post as one of the Queen's chaplains. I note that this was done after a call from Buckingham Palace, where the Queen probably would not have appreciated being associated with Gavin's protest about the invitation of Muslims to take part in a service of worship at the SEC Cathedral of Saint Mary in Glasgow.<br /><br />As Queen of England, with many Muslim subjects, Her Majesty may not have wanted to be associated with her Chaplain's voice of protest.<br /><br />God, being God, found it convenient to bless the seed of the servant girl, Hagar - being descended from Abraham, from whom, it is believed the modern day Muslim are also descended. The question is. does God love Muslims as well as Christians? Or does God only love Christians? Father Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17062632692873621258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-16474174851898380652017-03-16T13:20:59.963+13:002017-03-16T13:20:59.963+13:00The rashness and cruelty of much synodical rule is...The rashness and cruelty of much synodical rule is inherent in this institutionalisation of what is proper to *Caesar* but faithless in the *Body of Christ*. Bowman<br /><br />Amine! My point in a nutshell.Bryden Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15619512328964399016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-89194475299680863222017-03-16T10:45:12.921+13:002017-03-16T10:45:12.921+13:00Hi Fr Ron, you need to be familiar with the Church...Hi Fr Ron, you need to be familiar with the Church of England to know who Gavin Ashenden is. MichaelAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-64428210909865923182017-03-16T10:44:03.018+13:002017-03-16T10:44:03.018+13:00"Did they not think - thinking men that they ..."Did they not think - thinking men that they are - that this would inevitably lead to a lack of unifying reception?"<br /><br />Peter, do you seriously think that any diocesan bishop in the CofE has "unifying reception"<br /><br />How is the appointment of Philip North any different to e.g. the Bishop of Southwark or the Bishop of Sheffield?MichaelAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-91674905550465412472017-03-16T10:11:37.926+13:002017-03-16T10:11:37.926+13:00"(2) Bowman's question is quite appropria..."(2) Bowman's question is quite appropriate and relevant: the hoo-ha [controversy] over Philip North's appointment is a controversy over a specific set of views about women's ordination, a controversy notably absent from the appointment of Rod Thomas as bishop [albeit not as a diocesan]."<br /><br />Sorry Peter, but Bowman is just trying to put a gloss on the views of liberals in England which simply isn't there. <br /><br />The views of Rod Thomas and Philip North are not materially different - neither accepts that women can validly be bishops. One holds to reasoning based on tradition, the other says that scripture only permits men as leaders, but the end result is the same. Neither consider this a matter of adiaphora. <br /><br />This episode occurred (a) because the liberals are flexing their muscle in the CofE - they believe themselves to be in a stronger position than in 2015 when Thomas was appointed, and I expect they are right - and (b) because it concerned an appointment as a diocesan. They see Thomas as less important, but his time will also come. <br /><br />What we are seeing is exactly what occurred in TEC. The sooner that conservative or orthodox evangelicals realise that, the better. MichaelAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-5276033378643198592017-03-16T10:04:06.809+13:002017-03-16T10:04:06.809+13:00One question: "Who is Gavin Ashenden?"One question: "Who is Gavin Ashenden?"Father Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17062632692873621258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-33248051937927483242017-03-16T10:00:41.998+13:002017-03-16T10:00:41.998+13:00Oh please, Bowman, there was never any "impli...Oh please, Bowman, there was never any "implicit exclusion". The views of all involved in this controversy were well understood. 'Mutual flourishing' meant that those who did not accept the ministry of women bishops were entitled to a place in the Church of England. <br /><br />What has happened here is simple: the CofE bishops promised one thing, but then the liberal wing took over the agenda with a pressure-campaign on Philip North. And the bishops gave in to the liberals, as they always end up doing. The liberals went after North because he was being made a diocesan, not because his views are materially different to those of complementarian evangelicals like Rod Thomas. <br /><br />Complemmentarians believe that only men are called to positions of headship, including as bishops. That means their beliefs have exactly the same practical effect as those of Philip North's. <br /><br />Rod Thomas is in the church of England to minister to those who will not accept the ministry of woman bishops. The liberals have not gone after him yet, simply because he is not a diocesan, i.e. he is lower down their priority list . But they will. <br /><br />Personally, I don't mind any of this - I have always viewed the liberals in CofE as headed down the same oppressive path as the liberals in TEC. They will inevitably start deposing or expelling those whose views do not accord with theirs, so better that orthodox evangelicals in CofE realise that now. This episode will help them to realise that, and therefore motivate them to get serious about establishing new Anglican congregations in England which are outside the control of the CofE. Once enough of them are established, then they will need bishops of their own, and then comes the establishment of an English ACNA. MichaelAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-82085289933229690932017-03-16T08:56:57.335+13:002017-03-16T08:56:57.335+13:00Peter and Bryden, democracy seems less directly re...Peter and Bryden, democracy seems less directly relevant to this controversy than confusion about the differences between legitimacy and authority, promulgating and canonising, Caesar and the Body of Christ. <br /><br />For an Anglican synod to promulgate a newly invented dogma would be a *legitimate* exercise of power so long as the all the rules are followed. This is what a certain recent report that cannot be discussed proposed to ACANZP. But because nobody anywhere actually believes anything because of a mere majority vote, it would have no *authority* in heaven, or on earth, or under the earth. None who have opposed its conclusions would feel an inner change of conviction on seeing that a majority supported them, and even those who agreed with those conclusions would do so on the basis of their prior conviction.<br /><br />Of course, catholic churches have always been ruled by councils. But the recognised ones have not traditionally been much like the recent synods that Anglicans have modeled on civil parliaments. There is not space here for an extended comparison of, say, the Council of Orange and the TEC General Convention, but one important contrast is this-- local councils have tended to canonise practices spreading from afar whose authority is already widely seen, much as the disciples recognised that of our Lord, while our newfangled synods invent innovations on their own, and then try to impose them by mere force, much as Pontius Pilate tried and executed our Lord. The rashness and cruelty of much synodical rule is inherent in this institutionalisation of what is proper to *Caesar* but faithless in the *Body of Christ*.<br /><br />As with the popular choice of Barabbas, an appearance of democracy is sometimes very important to the caesarean sort of legitimacy. But it is so unimportant to the Body of Christ that something as momentous as the replacement of an apostle can be decided by casting lots under the protection of divine providence. <br /><br />Bowman WaltonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com