tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post6907651322949240126..comments2024-03-29T17:55:30.203+13:00Comments on Anglican Down Under: Is the Lord's Table Open to the Unbaptized?Peter Carrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-53194104365762788742009-07-27T05:17:50.470+12:002009-07-27T05:17:50.470+12:00Thanks James for sharing that important insight re...Thanks James for sharing that important insight re the use of the BCP!Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-18360378723626948042009-07-27T01:55:16.204+12:002009-07-27T01:55:16.204+12:00Anonymous, the problem is that the prayer book isn...Anonymous, the problem is that the prayer book isn't generally followed by TEC in its pastoral work - see Dr. Turner's article "An Unworkable Theology" - for the notion of TEC's "working theology" - http://www.firstthings.com/article/2007/01/an-unworkable-theology-26<br /><br />BB's article and the posting here had no questioning of "women in leadership" etc..<br /><br />You would do better to clarify rather than indirectly accuse of "slander" and "defamation" - I'm rather taken aback at how many TEC supporters launch into this type of vocabulary.Anglican Ecumenical Society / Jameshttp://anglicanecumenicalsociety.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-45005188102782873922009-07-03T07:14:31.800+12:002009-07-03T07:14:31.800+12:00Hi Anonymous,
Thank you for alerting me to the imp...Hi Anonymous,<br />Thank you for alerting me to the important wording on the 1979 prayer book.<br />Are you saying that the Tennesean misquoted Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori?Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-67140858801836235822009-07-02T21:14:48.606+12:002009-07-02T21:14:48.606+12:00Baby Blue, whose post you support writes “So it se...Baby Blue, whose post you support writes “So it seems we may have yet another example of the "dumbing down" of the covenant of Christian marriage as being just about what [the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church] vaguely calls "companionship," and not as scripture describes marriage as being akin to the relationship of Christ and the Church (which is a tad more than about a vague companionship). She justifies the reduction as saying, well, that old definition is no longer in the Episcopal Church's Prayer Book, so that's about it. Sorry, Jesus, sorry, St. Paul. Looks like those folks up in arms in the 1970s over the TEC Prayer Book may have been right after all.”<br /><br />Once again, Peter, you have not checked your facts. But, heck, it’s only a woman in leadership – something you say you support in theory, but clearly really struggle with in practice – so slander away – it’s not like biblical texts on defamation are anything like as clear as those on homosexuality!<br /><br />The TEC Prayer Book in fact clearly states “The bond and covenant of marriage was established by God in creation, and our Lord Jesus Christ adorned this manner of life by his presence and first miracle at a wedding in Cana of Galilee. It signifies to us the mystery of the union between Christ and his Church, and Holy Scripture commends it to be honored among all people.” and nowhere was the Presiding Bishop denying that. She only mentioned that BCP in the 1600s had the second purpose of marriage to be “to avoid fornication” – and that we would and do express the purpose differently now.<br /><br />It just was not possible for you to write something positive about TEC and leave it at that, was it? It had to be accompanied, as usual, with some unfounded put down.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com