tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post8383794856643831784..comments2024-03-28T22:29:52.666+13:00Comments on Anglican Down Under: Spinning like a topPeter Carrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-61128918324660247052010-07-31T10:08:17.104+12:002010-07-31T10:08:17.104+12:00I'm not terribly interested in Uganda, but I a...I'm not terribly interested in Uganda, but I am interested in adhering to the theology of the Prayer Book and the creeds. It's rather sad if that interest is now a minority view within the Episcopal Church, much less grounds for inviting someone (twice in two days!) to think about leaving.Fr. Bryan Owenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02040773309359417883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-55222332166922557882010-07-31T07:35:14.445+12:002010-07-31T07:35:14.445+12:00No doubt it was a shock for someone like Philip Tu...No doubt it was a shock for someone like Philip Turner, accustomed to the con-evo fundamentalism of Uganda, to be thrust back into a Western setting. However, to my way of thinking, TEC (with all of its warts) is far more “Anglican” in its ethos than that of provinces like Uganda. Obviously we disagree. But if you feel that Uganda has it right, I would suggest that you should resign from TEC and join them. After all, you will still receive your TEC pension for time served.<br /><br />Kurt Hill<br />Brooklyn, NYKurtnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-2224304502517385512010-07-31T07:01:03.120+12:002010-07-31T07:01:03.120+12:00Kurt, I think you're absolutely right that we ...Kurt, I think you're absolutely right that we don't talk enough about those sorts of things!<br /><br />Which is a reason why I have been critical over the last 3+ years of clergy who violate the ordination vow to conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Episcopal Church out of convenience, or because their personal opinions are at variance with the Church's teaching, or because they've wrapped their actions in the mantle of Spirit-guided prophecy. Whether they fall to the Left, Center, or Right on the theological spectrum, their actions violate basic agreement within the Church and loyalty to the Church.<br /><br />I've observed so much of this that I've come to think that Philip Turner is mostly correct that <a href="http://www.anglicanuse.org/AnUnworkableTheology.pdf" rel="nofollow">the "working theology" of the Episcopal Church is at variance with the official theology of the Prayer Book and the creeds</a>. I call it <a href="http://creedalchristian.blogspot.com/search/label/Anomic%20Anglicanism" rel="nofollow">anomic Anglicanism</a>.Fr. Bryan Owenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02040773309359417883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-37326082187085036722010-07-31T01:01:47.911+12:002010-07-31T01:01:47.911+12:00“...it's a highly ironic response in light of ...“...it's a highly ironic response in light of how much we talk in the Episcopal Church about ‘inclusiveness’ and ‘diversity.’--Bryan Owen<br /><br />Perhaps we in the Episcopal Church don’t talk enough about “basic agreement” and “loyalty”?<br /><br />Kurt Hill<br />Brooklyn, NYKurtnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-87951960699381027042010-07-30T19:02:53.100+12:002010-07-30T19:02:53.100+12:00Hi Al,
Bryden is welcome to guest post anytime.Hi Al,<br />Bryden is welcome to guest post anytime.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-90440393316180847772010-07-30T17:53:10.492+12:002010-07-30T17:53:10.492+12:00"In brief: because Hooker's "reason&..."In brief: because Hooker's "reason" is far more akin to Aquinas's than that of the Enlightenment's. And then because "experience" is ALWAYS preloaded and precoded via culture - just so Wittgenstein and others."<br /><br />Both *highly pertinent* points which indicate just where Tec and its fellow travelers have gone wrong and parted company with orthodox Christians in the past 40-50 years. (The Charismatic movement of the 1960s and 70s concealed the drift somewhat, but that movement is now dead within Tec.) I would be glad to see Bryden amplify these points, perhaps in some guest blogs on this site, How 'bout it, Peter?<br /><br />Many of us have been saying for a *long* time that the dispute has not been in the first instance about sexuality but more fundamental questions of theological method and revelation. I am sure Bryden is right that Tec is committed to an Enlightenment model of reason (Sapere aude!) rather than the traditional Thomist conception of reason as a divine gift to be used in conjuction - not competition - with divine revelation; and that experience has become its own interpreter, in the most naive of 19th century American expressions (think Walt Whitman), with maybe a bit of William James and reconstructed Freud and his misunderstood epigones thrown in. Ally this to Bultmannian biblical skepticism and you get <br />Bryden, Peter: let us hear more of this.<br />Al M.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-22819045633112960502010-07-30T13:12:51.446+12:002010-07-30T13:12:51.446+12:00Bryden, in regard to spinning tops, I have just be...Bryden, in regard to spinning tops, I have just been looking about for a quotation from one of the 17th century latitude-men, maybe Tillotson, who likened a broad church to a top resting on its big end, as opposed to his opponents whose church stood on its point and required constant whipping to stay upright. <br /><br />I would like to read your document, if you can email it to me:- hnp@inet.net.nz.<br /><br />As for Romans 12:1-2, it is my constant aspiration. <br /><br />Regards, HowardHoward Pilgrimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11822571103485207143noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-7553706425412491762010-07-30T11:14:24.958+12:002010-07-30T11:14:24.958+12:00How apposite is the title "spinning like a to...How apposite is the title "spinning like a top" when one reads some of the later comments on this thread!<br /><br />Of course, Howard, you are right to speak of both three legged stools and Wesleyan Quadrilaterals. And I sincerely say this. I have a 90 A4 page manuscript ready that seeks a way through just these quagmires of Scriptural interpretation and Christian formation for the 21st C Church. But I sense it might not appeal to many I have encountered in the likes of TEC. Why so?<br /><br />In brief: because Hooker's "reason" is far more akin to Aquinas's than that of the Enlightenment's. And then because "experience" is ALWAYS preloaded and precoded via culture - just so Wittgenstein and others. In which case how might you (or any of us) address Rom 12:1-2, or rather BE ADDRESSED BY ROM 12:1-2? That's the question.Bryden Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15619512328964399016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-1434294303516048762010-07-30T09:00:02.170+12:002010-07-30T09:00:02.170+12:00Kurt, I've sometimes asked myself the question...Kurt, I've sometimes asked myself the question: would expressing doubts or raising criticisms of the Episcopal Church's current trajectory be sufficient for others to suggest that a theologically centrist Episcopalian like me should leave the Episcopal Church? Perhaps your suggestion about the honorable thing for me to do is an answer to my question, at least for some on the "progressive" side of things. If that's the case, it's a highly ironic response in light of how much we talk in the Episcopal Church about "inclusiveness" and "diversity."Fr. Bryan Owenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02040773309359417883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-32467080614783695522010-07-30T08:23:20.048+12:002010-07-30T08:23:20.048+12:00Well, Bryan, if you really feel that way about The...Well, Bryan, if you really feel that way about The Episcopal Church, don’t you think that it’s time to do the honorable thing and resign from TEC’s priesthood and join the ACNA, REC, or whatever?<br /><br />Kurt Hill<br />Brooklyn, NYKurtnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-14692081163260783912010-07-30T07:13:42.892+12:002010-07-30T07:13:42.892+12:00Thanks for recent comments, including those helpfu...Thanks for recent comments, including those helpful, pertinent citations, Bryan!Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-32231126826900738852010-07-30T02:19:09.620+12:002010-07-30T02:19:09.620+12:00How do we know we have heard the authentic voice o...How do we know we have heard the authentic voice of God's Spirit? And what does it say when our interpretation of "experience" contradicts the consensual reading of scripture within the broad context of the Christian tradition for the last 2,000 years, and is not received as recognizably Christian by the majority of other Christians in our own day?<br /><br />A few relevant quotes:<br /><br />"If the community is the ultimate authority and the Bible just one member of the community, what prevents the community from plummeting into heresy?"<br /><br />"Without tradition as an outside marker, we have no way to know how far we have moved from biblical fidelity."<br /><br />~ Jim Belcher, <a href="http://www.thedeepchurch.com/" rel="nofollow">Deep Church: A Third Way Beyond Traditional and Emerging</a> (2009)<br /><br /><br />" ... our human experience, including our erotic experience, cannot be a replacement for the divine revelation preserved by the church. We must be careful not to let it become a counter-narrative or a counter-Scripture."<br /><br />~ <a href="http://eve-tushnet.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">Eve Tushnet</a><br /><br /><br />"When people say, for instance, 'We believe in the inclusion of all the baptized in every level of the Church's ministry,' I want to say, 'Well, yes, but baptism doesn't mean that everything in your character, personality, etc., God now accepts and wants to affirm as is.' ... you know that the doctrine of the sinfulness of humans is that every aspect of our personality is distorted and warped in some way or other. And the key thing is how do you tell the bits about you that are in fact part of your God-given humanness and must be accepted and celebrated, and how do you tell the bits about you that are actually things which, even though they feel as though they're deeply a part of who you are, have to be repented of and forsworn?" <br /><br />~ <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpQHGPGejKs" rel="nofollow">N. T. Wright</a>Fr. Bryan Owenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02040773309359417883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-75101218293094639642010-07-29T18:53:49.170+12:002010-07-29T18:53:49.170+12:00Thanks Al M. My figures are based on two of the l...Thanks Al M. My figures are based on two of the later stats I have on file, from Canada and Denmark BTW. And then secondly, the wording of my post was very careful: orientation-plus-culture is indeed a very difficult thing to 'measure'.Bryden Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15619512328964399016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-84163027375714502232010-07-29T18:06:28.378+12:002010-07-29T18:06:28.378+12:00Bryden, I agree with your last post, although glob...Bryden, I agree with your last post, although global figures for same-sex erotic attraction are very difficult to specify: based on the largest survey I know of (in the US in 1991), excluding bisexuality, s-sa could be c. 3% for males and just over 2% for females, although there are individual cultural and sub-cultural drivers, e.g. classical Athens had a siginificant ephebophiliac sub-culture through its male education and slave systems.<br />Tec has seemingly talked about nothing else for the past 20 years, and none of the costly and time consuming Communion efforts (Lambeth 98, Windsor, Dar es Salaam, Dromantine etc etc) has diverted it from its chosen goal. It is time to let it go, and to take its money and re-education efforts. I don't like quoting Gamaliel as if he were a prophet (he's more like a racetrack tipster), but if this new sexual ethic is of God (I doubt it!), then it will flourish.<br />Time for Tec to leave.<br />Al M.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-18019797375198222372010-07-29T16:55:52.700+12:002010-07-29T16:55:52.700+12:00Howard, you say: “The root cause of our conflict, ...Howard, you say: “The root cause of our conflict, IMHO, is that TEC and its friends have been unable to engage other Anglicans in a respectful theological conversation that gives due place to a reasoned assessment of our experience of faithful same-sex relationships in the modern world.”<br /><br />Just to be clear: I have over 70 MB of data on my file accumulated ever since mid 2003, let alone other material. I select three public documents only to make a single point.<br /><br />First there was TEC’s <i>To Set Our Hope on Christ</i>. Then there was Canada’s <i>The St Michael Report</i> (chaired by Christchurch’s +VM). Most recently we have had TEC’s HOB report, “Same-Sex Relationships in the Life of the Church”. I trust you have read and discerned all three for starters. For the first is just plain woeful. The second is more useful - although it inveigles, finally, by allegedly sticking to matters of “core doctrine” to conclude that same-sex issues are not so included. What!!!??? Questions of Christian anthropology and <i>Imago Dei</i> are NOT necessarily part of the Second Article of the Creed?! [Fortunately for all, myself included, this is after all Peter’s blog ... I say no more ...] And then the last is staggering - staggering, firstly in its pretence of equanimity (by giving two sets of voices), and then secondly by the sheer imbalance of comparative methodologies (and here I am trying to be very polite!). BTW: I allege the “pretence” on the grounds GCs etc. have simply given up “listening”, by merely “moving progressively ahead.”<br /><br />Conclusion: on the data cited (which BTW is some 5% of what I have read these last 25 years directly on the topic from all sides), I have to say, “my ‘reasoned assessment’ is that while some 1-2% of humans may indeed be predisposed to s-s orientation, NOTHING so far has persuaded me the Tradition is anything like wrong to condemn outright s-s behaviour. Indeed, ‘human marriage’ is the singular icon of Christ’s relationship with His Church. STET!” And so, what of the moral authority of Lambeth 1998, 1.10 - in all respects, yes - to date?Bryden Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15619512328964399016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-67101050083565286952010-07-29T16:00:14.759+12:002010-07-29T16:00:14.759+12:00Hi Howard,
I think you still do not get it about T...Hi Howard,<br />I think you still do not get it about TEC!<br /><br />It is not tag wrestling or boxing that is about to occur; it is more than half the teams leaving the league to play in another union.<br /><br />Is that what you want? You have not said yet what your own proposal is to prevent further break up of the Communion.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-67386358385606284322010-07-29T12:13:51.913+12:002010-07-29T12:13:51.913+12:00"...it will quietly forego some of its cheris..."...it will quietly forego some of its cherished Anglicana, and one of those would be the fondness for the three-legged stool." WHAT?!!*?! <br /><br />Now I know for sure that you are one of the vandals arriving to pull down my nice safe house. Expect me to put up a fight. Like this, for instance: -<br /><i>What sort of a holy, apostolic and catholic church can we imagine ourselves to be if we block our ears to the message God is sending us through our reasonable reflections on experience?</i> This is not a matter of a quaint historical personal predilection for three-legged stools. It is all about God's Truth, about recognising the voice of the Spirit here and now, and submission to his voice. I am not going to let conservatives assume the high ground as those who listen to scripture alone. Here is a counter-charge: you may be hiding behind scripture to avoid the voice of God.<br /><br />Too much is at stake for us to be altogether nice to one another, even as Anglicans. As you wrote, "Except I do not think it is going to quite work out as smoothly as that ..." TEC is not going to go away, and behind the rather banal pleasantries which you rightly reject, the gloves are coming off on both sides. Or is it tag wrestling we are doing here?Howard Pilgrimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11822571103485207143noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-65527483548852078912010-07-29T10:51:53.266+12:002010-07-29T10:51:53.266+12:00This comment has been removed by the author.Fr. Bryan Owenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02040773309359417883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-26595075265334519812010-07-29T10:50:52.048+12:002010-07-29T10:50:52.048+12:00I think it's important to add that it's no...I think it's important to add that it's not a merely "Puritan" hermeneutic that Peter is appealing to, but the hermeneutic of the majority of the Christian tradition for the past 2,000 years and Jewish tradition for the previous several thousand years as well. Even advocates for changing Church teaching and practice on this matter <a href="http://www.standfirminfaith.com/?/sf/page/7146" rel="nofollow">like Luke Timothy Johnson</a> acknowledge this.<br /><br />What provinces like TEC are asking the rest of the Anglican and the larger Christian world to believe is that, although we constitute less than a fraction of a percent of all Christians who have ever lived, we have a new revelation that has been given to no one else and which is not recognizable as within the normative bounds of the faith to most other Christians living today. <br /><br />If so many our predecessors and contemporaries have gotten it so wrong on such a basic point of sexual ethics, in what other areas of moral theology have they blown it? And for that matter, what points of core doctrine might they have gotten wrong, too? Can we <i>really</i> trust the sources of authority we have received? Crack the door to the hermeneutic of suspicion on tradition and the consensual reading of scripture on such matters a little bit, and before long there may be few reasons to not open the door all the way and walk out of the house. I've heard some call that "liberation."<br /><br />Not only that, but given our <a href="http://www.anglicantaonga.org.nz/Features/Freedom" rel="nofollow">Presiding Bishop's narrative justification</a> for what we're doing, in which she places the "full inclusion" agenda on the same moral trajectory as the abolition of slavery, woman's suffrage, the Civil Rights movement and desegregation, failure to embrace the agenda of the Liberal Party is morally analogous to opposing the abolition of slavery, the right of women and African Americans to vote, and the abolition of racial segregation. Which is evil. And the Church cannot and should not tolerate evil.Fr. Bryan Owenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02040773309359417883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-59025799087017058622010-07-29T10:02:52.211+12:002010-07-29T10:02:52.211+12:00Hi Howard,
If the Anglican Communion has any prete...Hi Howard,<br />If the Anglican Communion has any pretensions to being an expression of God's one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church, it will quietly forego some of its cherished Anglicana, and one of those would be the fondness for the three-legged stool. It is not only the Puritans who set great store by Scripture (and I did not think the Puritans set a lot of store by 'Scripture and tradition').<br /><br />Be that as it may, I would like to pick up on two things you say:<br /><br />(1) I recall few if any signs of TEC making a concerted effort to engage the Communion theologically on questions of homosexuality. (Recall, only this year did its own House of Bishops consider an internal TEC effort to engage theologically with homosexuality).<br /><br />(2) When you say "TEC has good reasons for its impatience, and good Anglican grounds for pressing ahead with its mission, on its own patch. If this means parting company with those who demand a theological rationale that is constructed on Puritan grounds, then so be it" my question is "Why, then, is it sticking around in the Communion? Why has it not parted company and gone?" Instead it seems to be stubbornly sticking around, watching and waiting (patiently!) while the "Puritans" fall away, and it finds, hey, presto, that the Communion has been nicely made in its own image! (Cf. Bryan Owen's comment above).<br /><br />Except I do not think it is going to quite work out as smoothly as that ...Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-8345078295053122472010-07-29T09:35:18.473+12:002010-07-29T09:35:18.473+12:00"There is this thing called "Scripture&q..."There is this thing called "Scripture" and this other thing called "tradition". Melded together they form this combination which has guided the church through the ages." <i>Why did you not include "reason", (meaning the lessons God expects us to learn from experience) at this point of your argument, Peter?</i> <br /><br />Bringing reason in later, and diminishing it to some sort of political astuteness, shows that your position, and that of those for whom you speak, is far from Anglican centre ground. You write as though the Puritan hermeneutic, rejected by the CofE in the 17th century, is the established norm of Anglicans worldwide ... except that the Puritans would not have allowed you to give tradition such prominence alongside scripture. As for the Pope and his followers, you could hardly say the Holy Spirit is currently bearing witness that they have got their policy on sexuality right.<br /><br />The root cause of our conflict, IMHO, is that TEC and its friends have been unable to engage other Anglicans in a respectful theological conversation that gives due place to a reasoned assessment of our experience of faithful same-sex relationships in the modern world. Many of those who refuse to consider the possibility that same-sex relationships could ever be holy, including some of your commenters (and your good self?), have been nurtured in a theological tradition with a Puritan belief that scripture alone is the measure of holiness. Puritanism is an important part of our historical diversity, and is well represented in the provinces established by the CMS, but it does not define Anglican common ground. Can we overcome this fundamental theological difference among us, even with patience? <br /><br />TEC has good reasons for its impatience, and good Anglican grounds for pressing ahead with its mission, on its own patch. If this means parting company with those who demand a theological rationale that is constructed on Puritan grounds, then so be it, and I stand right alongside them ... but am still more than willing to engage with the neo-Puritans on your blog :)Howard Pilgrimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11822571103485207143noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-10041158601255082972010-07-29T07:34:18.615+12:002010-07-29T07:34:18.615+12:00Thank you Bryan for that pertinent bit of underlin...Thank you Bryan for that pertinent bit of underlining ...!Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-73936210488222586912010-07-29T01:51:21.125+12:002010-07-29T01:51:21.125+12:00All of this reminds me of a comment a clergy colle...All of this reminds me of a comment a clergy colleague made last summer while General Convention was in session. She said, "<a href="http://creedalchristian.blogspot.com/2009/07/getting-conservatives-out-of-way.html" rel="nofollow">It's amazing the progressive things the Church can do now that the conservatives are out of the way</a>." Breathtaking as such a comment is, at least it's more honest than pretending to be "diminished" by the absence of those whose presence would put up obstacles to achieving total victory for the Liberal Party platform.Fr. Bryan Owenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02040773309359417883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-51489149090491483482010-07-28T22:38:56.318+12:002010-07-28T22:38:56.318+12:00*"reason": one of the three legs of the ...*"reason": one of the three legs of the three-legged stool, the exercise of which is useful, Anglicans have found ...Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-72231260864683734782010-07-28T22:36:49.630+12:002010-07-28T22:36:49.630+12:00(cont'd.)
Back to Scripture and tradition: as...(cont'd.)<br /><br />Back to Scripture and tradition: as has been said elsewhere on the internet: TEC are the innovators. It is up to them, not others, to carry the burden of proof that they are innocent rather than guilty of transgressing God's law.<br /><br />In the meantime, I am intrigued, Howard, that in your fervant support for TEC, you offer no signs of how the Communion might flourish again.<br /><br />I remain of the view, whatever metaphors are used to characterise the situation, that TEC's stubborn refusal to admit responsibility for their actions is diminishing the Communion before our eyes, even as we talk. I for one am deeply dissatisfied to belong to an Anglican Communion which appears to have now lost Nigeria, Uganda, and many good Anglicans in North America.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.com