tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post9216012254779215798..comments2024-03-29T12:44:28.973+13:00Comments on Anglican Down Under: Are women bishops a collusion with culture or development of Galatians 3:28?Peter Carrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comBlogger32125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-54025671451681185912015-02-10T07:37:03.059+13:002015-02-10T07:37:03.059+13:00Hi Bryden
Thank you for explaining that further f...Hi Bryden<br /><br />Thank you for explaining that further for me. I understand more comprehensively now.<br /><br />Without a moral plumbline (a.k.a.) the authority given to Christ, morality is reduced to the subjective terms of those who interpret it. And the terms they use often lack their original intent/meaning. As human's we do not determine virtue (this is not within our sovereignty) but are subject to working on developing those traits of character as informed by scripture.<br /><br />It is noticeable in schools recently with the urgent call for teaching of "values"; as my mother commented to a parent one, but whose "values"?<br /><br />Thanks again,<br />JeanJeannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-77383385603148496292015-02-07T17:27:00.494+13:002015-02-07T17:27:00.494+13:00Hi Jean! The first thing to say is that “emotivism...Hi Jean! The first thing to say is that “emotivism” is MacIntyre’s term from <i>After Virtue</i>, not mine. <br /><br />That said however, he himself has borrowed the term from notions in the early 20th C derived from one GE Moore - with a severe twist. For we must go further and note that, while Moore used the notion of emotivism to describe seemingly the meaning of so-called objective moral judgments as being in his view nothing but subjective attempts to get other people to agree with the one making the judgment - this is Moore’s claimed theory of meaning - MacIntyre on the other hand suggests this theory of meaning is actually a theory of use - how moral utterances are being used by particular people, in a whole variety of settings. All of which is MacIntyre’s chapters 2 &3, in which he displays how emotivism cannot create any context in which genuine authoritative moral discourse can occur; we’ve only clashes of autonomous wills towards a variety of self-perceived goals which mostly have little in common.<br /><br />All this then becomes the foil for his own reconstruction of Virtue as the Means towards a Common social End. The snag however is that practitioners of emotivism - most post Enlightenment western folk, who try to engage in moral discourse - continue to employ a host of words (to try to convince others to their point of view), which were properly once upon a time both only meaningful and used in alien systems of thought and practice - alien that is to the now assumed notion of the individual who is sovereign in their moral autonomy; just so, “my opinion”! <br /><br />I.e. back to my previous comments about ontology and creation: either human being IS a creature, albeit in God’s Image, and so accountable to the Creator and the Creator’s world/reality; or, humans, with a marred Image, try to ‘speak’ and ‘do’ ‘morality’, yet without reference to the Author - hence marred - for it is deemed humans may be their own, even ‘loving’ moral selves. BUT: who determines what ‘loving’ actually looks like, what the ‘loving act’ actually is? For who would have guessed a strange Jew strung up on a Roman gibbet one afternoon centuries ago was The Act of The Loving God? That great Pauline Sermon, 1 Cor 1-4, now has not the rich context of Jewish, Graeco-Roman society but the post Reformation/Renaissance, post Enlightenment world as its foil. <br /><br />The bottom-line: my opinion versus your opinion versus Fred’s opinion; or, nothing less than God’s revealed ‘opinion’ ... that climax of the drama begun in Abraham and fulfilled in the Son of Abraham, Son of David, Son of God. So that our participation in that drama wherever, whenever human selves become shrouded in the Great Triune Divine Self - viz Gal 2:20 or Augustine’s <i>Confessions</i> ala Jean-Luc Marion - is the only basis for and expression of authoritative human morality.<br /><br />PS the link with Oden is that both he and MacIntyre have modernity's construction of the identity of human being in their sights. <br />Bryden Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15619512328964399016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-80317020489675592802015-02-05T08:09:16.693+13:002015-02-05T08:09:16.693+13:00Hi Bryden
I don't really comprehend what you ...Hi Bryden<br /><br />I don't really comprehend what you meant in your comment but if it means:<br /><br />We have become a culture that justifies itself by how we feel and that emotive words such as love have had their meaning reduced to this then I would need to concur.<br /><br />The number of times my friends will say, 'but I no longer love them' or if it 'feels (good or right) then it has to be right'. <br /><br />Blessings<br />JeanJeannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-28009471454204520512015-02-04T22:51:56.539+13:002015-02-04T22:51:56.539+13:00Are you advocating solipsism Ron?!
Please google ...Are you advocating solipsism Ron?!<br /><br />Please google Rowan Greer. Bryden Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15619512328964399016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-25839134869796026262015-02-04T22:23:00.508+13:002015-02-04T22:23:00.508+13:00Well, Bryden, it all comes down to the opinion of ...Well, Bryden, it all comes down to the opinion of one person - be s/he historian, theologian or humanist. One can only live by one's own experience of 'The Truth'. There are many who would argue with your representation of it - as with mine, come to that.Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-83994208892228102072015-02-04T20:39:16.477+13:002015-02-04T20:39:16.477+13:00Well Ron; let me say this. “Emotivism” is clearly ...Well Ron; let me say this. “Emotivism” is clearly and specifically defined by MacIntyre in his <i>After Virtue</i>, now in its 3rd edition and the subject of global conferences and much secondary literature. It has nothing to do with your own experiential musings. On the contrary, the term seeks to nail the poverty of moral discourse in western culture these past decades, even centuries, in order then to restore our sense of what passes for contemporary ‘ethics’ to a far more robust search for “virtue” once more - that is, to ground human morality upon an ontological appreciation of reality and human behaviour as a reflection of what that is.<br /><br />As for your attempt at authoritative ‘Anglican’ reasoning on matters of faith in your last para, I shall let one far more eloquent than I give his verdict:<br /><br />“My suggestion will be that the idea [of the “Triple Cord”, as he calls it] is less helpful than it appears and that it proves impossible to argue that Hooker’s view really illustrates it or that the Caroline divines after Hooker follow his views”. So Rowan Greer, <i>Anglican Approaches to Scripture: From the Reformation to the Present</i> (Crossroad, 2006), p.14. In fact, it is just a modern, ideological ‘invention’! One moreover that many today spout but few are able actually to employ ... because it is unemployable, giving rise to basic contradictions.Bryden Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15619512328964399016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-85725804609519637852015-02-04T17:19:41.659+13:002015-02-04T17:19:41.659+13:00"...although she is not shown in the novel pr..."...although she is not shown in the novel presiding at Holy Communion, but then, in those days that would have been a very infrequent observance anyway)."<br /><br />Tim, I think you will find that the methodists at that time set great store by the celebration of Holy Communion. It was one of their chief complaints against the leadership of the Church of England, that placed so little emphasis on the Eucharist and celebrated it infrequently. MichaelAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-4211578802991137162015-02-04T17:14:29.032+13:002015-02-04T17:14:29.032+13:00"Oden remained a Methodist which suggests he ..."Oden remained a Methodist which suggests he did not agree with everything he read in Augustine and Aquinas (for the combined logic of both, if agreed with, must lead to membership of the church of Rome)."<br /><br />John Calvin also thought highly of both Augustine and Aquinas. <br /><br />Like Oden, I believe that he did not become a Roman Catholic. MichaelAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-28464472317791487472015-02-03T21:07:34.333+13:002015-02-03T21:07:34.333+13:00Hi Andrew
I would imagine you are right the reaso...Hi Andrew<br /><br />I would imagine you are right the reason why the issue of women as a whole as preacher's is so controversial in the Middle East is because culturally women in leadership positions is universally unwelcome in the region. <br /><br />At the same time the same stance was held for years historically in the UK and America and it took years to change. The difference I perceive perhaps in your current situation is at 'this point in history' and the current climate with Islam is the unity of the churches in your area is of great importance.<br /><br />This does not of course mean that those within the diocese can not agree with women in leadership even though it is not practiced in your region. Nor that there won't come a time when God will choose or call people to change this landscape. Or that He may be doing so even now.<br /><br />Wisdom and discernment seem key aspects.<br /><br />Blessings Jean<br /><br /> Jeannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-24189429212079817012015-02-03T20:42:08.304+13:002015-02-03T20:42:08.304+13:00Oh! Dearie you, Bryden. In the midst of your trava...Oh! Dearie you, Bryden. In the midst of your travail I detect a lyrical Song of Despair:<br /><br />" And so we still hanker after “love” and “justice” - even if these and similar words are virtually emptied of their real content by means of what MacIntyre rightly calls “emotivism”, such is the state of moral discourse given its history these past decades, even centuries." - B.B. <br /><br />"Emotivism" (new word - presumably meaning emotiveness or emotivity) is an essential element of being human. We are creatures of our emotions. Or else, we may hardly be called 'human'.<br /><br />The words Peace and Justice - like Love are gospel words, relating to the sort of behaviour enjoined on all humanity by none less than Jesus Christ. One;s understanding of such words, of course, will depend on one's personal experience of their meaning. <br /><br />My own experience of Peace, Love and Justice, is securely anchored in the understanding of how the life of Jesus has affected my heart, mind soul and very existence. If that is not emotive, I'm not sure what it can be. Is that not a part of our common humanity? And is it somehow invalidated by my ability to use Scripture, Tradition and Reason - those 3 characteristics of classic Anglicanism that has formed my faith? <br />Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-67482378056768719152015-02-03T15:42:57.983+13:002015-02-03T15:42:57.983+13:00Oh dearie me! I have been waiting for the so-calle...Oh dearie me! I have been waiting for the so-called “elephant” to appear with trumpet-like sounds ... And even considered a post to that effect myself y’day ...<br /><br />For of course there is a real tension: cultural accommodation and/or relativism versus counter-cultural Gospel transformation and/or appropriation, even purification. Church history is littered with examples of this dynamic and its seemingly often contradictory, intermediary stances. But that is what they almost always are: intermediary positions, as the Gospel takes its own redeeming time to act, like yeast. But what if the salt then becomes “foolish” - the literal Greek of Matt 5:13?<br /><br />Deep down it’s a matter of ontology, of a theology of creation. Matter matters! That’s why the title Peter has given this thread is so intriguing. For Gal 3:28 has a delightful shift when the third pair of 1st C binaries is mentioned, citing Gen 1. It’s not that ontology is being done away with “in Christ”. Rather, membership in the People of God is coming to its fruition as per the blessing of Abraham and the fulfilment of God’s economy of salvation for all the world. Chs 3-4 is the most delightful exegesis by Paul of further Genesis passages in light of Messiah’s arrival.<br /><br />But it’s exactly at this point that western contemporary culture is at its most ironic: besotted with materialism, it eschews any real ontology, as its idolizes its autonomous capacity to “construct” its own cultural “identities”, one after the other in rapid succession. Yet curiously, a lingering Christian ethic somehow remains - like a grain of salt. And so we still hanker after “love” and “justice” - even if these and similar words are virtually emptied of their real content by means of what MacIntyre rightly calls “emotivism”, such is the state of moral discourse given its history these past decades, even centuries. <br /><br />And so what kind of chance is there for ‘consensus’ when such contradictory cultures as those of the Middle East and those of the contemporary West meet each other? “Lost in Translation” becomes the rule. Thank God we are reminded of the Creator’s way through this quagmire during the Season of Epiphany, a due vestige of the Tradition extolled by the likes of Oden ... But just as the Matthean Gospel uniquely warns of “foolishness”, even as it narrates the story of the Magi at the beginning, so it also narrates at its conclusion the Great Commissioning of the Church to the task of Christian discipleship - of all nations and cultures. As Oden and others are only too acutely aware: “Tradition is the living faith of the dead; traditionalism is the dead faith of the living.” So Jaroslav Pelikan, author of that landmark five part tome, <i>The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine</i>.Bryden Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15619512328964399016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-36854796474560670062015-02-03T09:28:48.168+13:002015-02-03T09:28:48.168+13:00Your last post, andrew, highlights the elephant in...Your last post, andrew, highlights the elephant in the room on how one is to practise their Christian Faith. There are different cultural suppositions that already presuppose difference in the understanding of basic disciplines that may be different for each part of the Body of Christ. As you have so wisely said: If these can be accommodated - without severing relationships, then why not others - such a those concerning gender and sexaulity.<br /><br />However, we might already have our answer - the divided Church. If the Body of Christ can be divided on the acceptance of a common understanding of the gospel, then why question division on cultural aspects in society?<br /><br />The only hope for the Church and the world may be to learn to live together in harmony - with peace and justice as our watchwords. After all, these are very 'Christian' principles - based, not on Judgement but on Love. ("They'll know you're my disciples by your Love")Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-42832167024713281882015-02-03T00:10:37.279+13:002015-02-03T00:10:37.279+13:00Hi Jean & Ron,
Thanks for your comments :)
I h...Hi Jean & Ron,<br />Thanks for your comments :)<br />I have read Son of Hamas, but in the English version. My Arabic isn't quite good enough to read novels.<br /><br />Your comments are quite perceptive. There would be a negative reaction from other Christian churches here, none of whom ordain women as priests. The Coptic Orthodox and Brethren still require women and men to sit separately in the congregation. Also, relationships with Muslim groups would suffer somewhat. The concern I have is that there are all sorts of other differences with other churches we are able to live with - e.g. fasting, clergy marriage, sacraments and monasticism. Why can we live with those differences but not women leaders? I think the answer is culturally in the Middle East female leadership in any form is unpopular, so the church reflects that opinion. Not that they would put that in a statement.Andrew Reidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-43395187550790279242015-02-02T10:12:09.017+13:002015-02-02T10:12:09.017+13:00Thank you, Andrew. Now I understand - not perfectl...Thank you, Andrew. Now I understand - not perfectly, but to a lesser degree! Agape. RonFather Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-64331526178283989652015-02-02T06:23:08.845+13:002015-02-02T06:23:08.845+13:00Hi Andrew (Reid)
There is no doubt the Anglican D...Hi Andrew (Reid)<br /><br />There is no doubt the Anglican Diocese in Egypt walks a fine line among many social and political issues; and also that it's decision not to ordain women is for 'the greater good?" - perhaps an example of contextual decision making?<br /><br />As an aside no doubt you are ahead of me on this one. But have you read the Son of Hammas and did you know the arabic version (e-book) is free.<br /><br />All the best for the good work you do,<br />JeanJeannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-62343540237343681572015-02-02T00:59:26.970+13:002015-02-02T00:59:26.970+13:00Fr Ron,
The web address is in Arabic, which html ...Fr Ron,<br /><br />The web address is in Arabic, which html doesn't understand, so it converts it to symbols instead. Let me try and write the Arabic here.<br />http://www.arabic.dioceseofegypt.org/بيان-إقليم-الكنيسة-الأسقفية-<br />بالقدس-وا<br />It means "statement of the Anglican province of Jersulem and..." (cut off).<br />AndrewAndrew Reidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-46803158956757950882015-02-01T08:17:24.706+13:002015-02-01T08:17:24.706+13:00Excellent, Bosco!Excellent, Bosco!Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-21086630025062264842015-02-01T07:49:22.010+13:002015-02-01T07:49:22.010+13:00To add to your point, Peter, the word "men&qu...To add to your point, Peter, the word "men", until relatively recently, was understood to include "women", and I'm sure that there are readers of your blog who still see it as doing so, and use it so.<br /><br />The point behind that is that, until relatively recently, the word "bishop" referred exclusively to men (in the uninclusive sense of those with the Y chromosome). <br /><br />We are in a transition time of language around this when we need to stress that a bishop can be a woman. The time is coming when the term for a woman bishop will be "a bishop". <br /><br />Blessings<br /><br />Boscoliturgyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11822769747947139669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-57616933889674773182015-02-01T07:21:07.662+13:002015-02-01T07:21:07.662+13:00I hesitate to enter where grammatico-spelling ange...I hesitate to enter where grammatico-spelling angels fear to tread (!) but one of the caveats on my grammatico-spelling conscience re 'women bishops' has always been that their opposites (in general usage in a world of 'women bishops' has not been (in my estimation) 'men bishops' but 'male bishops'.<br /><br />Thus my question to modern grammarians (or should that be post-modern grammarians?) is this: whether a noun or an adjective is a qualifier, does its perceived opposite qualifier have any bearing?<br /><br />Speaking simply as an ecclesiastical blogger, I wonder if some kind of fairness dictates that if I am a 'women bishops' rather than 'female bishops' person then I should consistently refer to their counterparts on the bench as 'men bishops' and not as 'male bishops.'Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-58270940267689735132015-02-01T06:59:23.590+13:002015-02-01T06:59:23.590+13:00"Women bishops" is a term used by the BB..."Women bishops" is a term used by the BBC, The Tablet, and other reputable publications.<br /><br />Since "snow flake" didn't cut the Canadian mustard to demonstrate that a noun can be used to modify a noun, here are some other examples (some of which must surely be used in Canada) where even Canadians must surely not be insisting that the modifying noun be rejected and be replaced by a cognate adjective:<br /><br />boy scout<br />candle flame<br />church spire<br />string theory<br />women bishops<br />toy shop<br />car door<br />arms dealer<br />door bell<br />picnic table<br /><br />Blessings<br /><br />Boscoliturgyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11822769747947139669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-32054932011804391802015-01-31T22:44:14.979+13:002015-01-31T22:44:14.979+13:00Jean, your historical point is well illustrated by...Jean, your historical point is well illustrated by George Eliot's famous 1859 novel 'Adam Bede', which is set in 1799 in the days of the Methodist revival and features as one of its main characters a female Methodist preacher named Dinah Morris (who certainly 'teaches...men' although she is not shown in the novel presiding at Holy Communion, but then, in those days that would have been a very infrequent observance anyway). Interestingly, it is the evangelical woman Dinah who exercises a preaching ministry, which the latitudinarian rector Mr. Irwine disapproves of. Apparently the character of Dinah was based on Eliot's aunt Elizabeth Evans, who was a Methodist preacher.<br /><br />So yes, acceptance of the ministry of women has 'waxed and waned' in the history of the church. Interestingly, in Britain one of the first denominations to accept their ministry was the Salvation Army, hardly a bastion of theological liberalism!<br /><br />TimAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-85170033089298537952015-01-31T20:23:44.488+13:002015-01-31T20:23:44.488+13:00Oh Tim and Bosco can I shock you completely re gra...Oh Tim and Bosco can I shock you completely re grammar.<br /><br />As it was decided during my educational years by the power that be that this particular aspect of the english language was to be learnt through osmosis it was not in the curriculum. <br /><br />As such I am extremely pleased if I recognise a noun from an adjective, or if I get the possessive hyphen in the right place, or even use a comma correctly. It is amazing where trial an error get you.... : ) <br /><br />But I appreciate your tips!Jeannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-11705387187628078202015-01-31T19:22:20.974+13:002015-01-31T19:22:20.974+13:00Thanks Jean!
Your survey makes a good point as we ...Thanks Jean!<br />Your survey makes a good point as we try to understand where we have come from when making decisions about where we are going to ... Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-70710435245147913752015-01-31T19:16:45.108+13:002015-01-31T19:16:45.108+13:00Hi Peter
Regarding the role of women and the coll...Hi Peter<br /><br />Regarding the role of women and the collusion with culture tis an interesting debate and as you say one that will not be solved on this blog : )<br /><br />Twas a thinking re women and leadership. This led to a bit of research and an understanding that actually woman as preachers/leaders has in past had times when it was acceptable, and times when it wasn't, as far as culture goes.<br /><br />While Deboroah not only judged Israel, she was also a prophetess and directed Israel spiritually, and she was married. Then there were the odd female teachers of housechurches who arrived on the scene after the crucifiction of Christ.<br /><br />In years to come woman evangelists have been accepted in some churches, rejected in others. In America woman preached prior to women's 'liberalisation'. They did so without a salary, only if their husband approved (if they were married), and did not baptise. Some churches allowed them to preach others didn't so they preached out in the open. Some husbands allowed their wives to be co-leaders with them. But what they did was counter-cultural to the patriarchal norm of society then.<br /><br />Now for many the role of women as leaders in some countries is culturally accepted in the church and in society, which of course makes it easier for women to do so. It has not, however, as far as I can ascertain come about because of a collusion with culture. They were on the scene long before the suffragete movement.<br /><br /><br />Blessings<br />Jean<br /><br />Jeannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-34596435963969201392015-01-31T09:32:34.683+13:002015-01-31T09:32:34.683+13:00Bosco, in this country we spell it 'snowflake&...Bosco, in this country we spell it 'snowflake' - it's something we're very familiar with!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com