tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post8930230831666406165..comments2024-03-28T22:29:52.666+13:00Comments on Anglican Down Under: Rules and IntegritiesPeter Carrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-27298584273309839892014-07-02T11:17:39.296+12:002014-07-02T11:17:39.296+12:00".The Doctrine of the ACANZP is well and true...".The Doctrine of the ACANZP is well and truely (sic) defined in the Constitution and the Church of England Empowering Act 1928.The prohibitions on changing that Doctrine covers far more than just the 'Nature and Character of God'.<br /><br /> - Glen Young - June 29, 2014 -<br /><br />So, are you saying Glen, that there have been no substantive changes in 'doctrine' since the adaptation by ACANZP of the 1928 Church of England Empowering Act?<br /><br />The Constitution itself, I submit, has actually been changed in ways that have enable new developments in the application of Doctrine: Divorce and re-marriage; ordination of women; contraception - are only some of the changes of doctrine that have been assumed into the theological undergirding of our Church.<br /><br />What has not changed is the basic credal Doctrine of God - as the Trinity of Persons! Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-63670388531000993512014-06-29T19:09:26.388+12:002014-06-29T19:09:26.388+12:00Hi ron,
It is pleasing to read that St.Michaels[Ch...Hi ron,<br />It is pleasing to read that St.Michaels[Christchurch]is alive and well.<br />It would be helpfull,to a proper understand of the 'crisis'which the ACANZP faces,[either now or in 2016]; if you could see the differance between the a sin and the sinner.<br />I have never said, that I veiw homosexuals as in any way,'agents of the devil'.<br />I have stated quite clearly that the homosexual act is contary to Christ's teachingsand also other 'inspired revelation of God'.<br />Any person who experiences same-gender attraction enters the Body of Christ, on the same basis as any of us-[as sinners who are called to die to sin , and become alive in Christ.]<br />My objection is, to the modern revisionists, whose doctrine teaches that same-gender marriage can be included in 'Holy Matrimony'.<br />This stance will split the ACANZP as it has, the Epicopalian Church USA.<br />So,I ask you again Ron,lay out the Scriptural texts which support your stance.There are many authorities which differ with you on the 'developement of doctrine.The Doctrine of the ACANZP is well and truely defined in the Constitution and the Church of England Empowering Act 1928.The prohibitions on changing thast Doctrine covers far more than just the 'Nature and Character of God'.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03140119419720500905noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-35389707202042539372014-06-26T10:37:32.201+12:002014-06-26T10:37:32.201+12:00I want, straight away, to distance the Church of S...I want, straight away, to distance the Church of St. Michael and All Angels, Christchurch, from the obvious 'crisis' of confidence that Glen speaks of here, at another ACANZP church with the same Patron Saint.<br /><br />Saint Michael is well known for his valorous fighting against 'The Devil' - but not against false demons. We, in Christchurch, do not regard homosexuals as in any way 'agents of the devil'. Our Daily Mass celebration is, we find, a very good medicine against apostacy and heresy of any kind.<br /><br />Jesus tells us that "Wherever I am, there will my servants be". He also said, "Be not afraid". The Gospel tells us that 'perfect love casts out fear. We are not afraid!Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-88463882340030536142014-06-25T17:42:00.119+12:002014-06-25T17:42:00.119+12:00Now that we have had the great O.E.;going from the...Now that we have had the great O.E.;going from the English Nonjurors to the Russian Bolsheviks, shall we return home to the question of the ACANZP.The split has already begun and St.Michaels is in crisis.The situation has shown the lack of any ordained leadership; from the Episcopal Office down.One is left with the feeling, that the orthodox voice is no longer of any concern to those who think that Christ's Church;is in fact theirs. Hello Episcopalian Church USA;here we come.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03140119419720500905noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-19931133707565168552014-06-23T23:02:47.835+12:002014-06-23T23:02:47.835+12:00"Do you know what an Old Bolshevik is?" ..."Do you know what an Old Bolshevik is?" - carl -<br /><br />Could you be an example? 'Kicking against the (imagined) pricks?'Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-39144275519876675472014-06-21T20:47:15.050+12:002014-06-21T20:47:15.050+12:00Carl,You make a valid point about how Stalin assum...Carl,You make a valid point about how Stalin assumed power.It is obvious that the liberal revisionists are not missing any opportunity to get their collegues into places of power.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03140119419720500905noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-15178987036740785982014-06-18T07:31:44.860+12:002014-06-18T07:31:44.860+12:00Yes, FRS, being shot in the back of the head will ...Yes, FRS, being shot in the back of the head will typically stop a man from breathing. (Or stabbed in the head with an ice pick, as the case may be.) You have absolutely no idea who those men were, do you. You haven't the first clue why I chose them as illustrations.<br /><br />Do you know what an Old Bolshevik is?<br /><br />carlcarl jacobshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05195615264891904953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-43025860738714631022014-06-17T23:58:44.269+12:002014-06-17T23:58:44.269+12:00"I quite understand why these Bolsheviks ende..."I quite understand why these Bolsheviks ended up dead" - carl jacobs.<br /><br />The answer to this spectacular conclusion could be one of many. Because they stopped breathing? Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-27651234811748318832014-06-17T05:56:58.462+12:002014-06-17T05:56:58.462+12:00Hi Carl
We shall see. In our church with its stron...Hi Carl<br />We shall see. In our church with its strong minded and varying dioceses the extension of your analogy would be to say if Russia = diocese X in 1917 then, Y is Greece, Z is Serbia ... Different outcomes for different dioceses.<br /><br />You make a good point about control of 'recognition'. Again, this will vary from diocese to diocese.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-86713712303684946912014-06-17T00:03:43.759+12:002014-06-17T00:03:43.759+12:00Peter
You are so very focused on the trivial and ...Peter<br /><br />You are so very focused on the trivial and the irrelevant. You remind me of Muliukov and Kerensky arguing over the form of the Provisional government while the Bolsheviks are shooting people in the street. Revolutions aren't won by words on a page. Forget fixing your Constitution. Focus on the real problem.<br /><br />The church hierarchy is going to lose control of these 'recognitions' almost immediately. The forces pushing change are going to use them to do what they want to do, and justify their actions in the name of the 'Justice imperative.' They are going to quickly morph these recognitions into de facto blessings and quasi-marriages, and dare the hierarchy to do something about it. A challenge the hierarchy will totally fail, btw. And then what will you do? Point to your constitution?<br /><br />This is your problem. It doesn't matter what the formal teaching of your church is once the functional teaching has been changed. It doesn't matter what people once pledged allegiance to when there is no longer anyone to force them to maintain that allegiance. Fight all you like over the words. They haven't the power to compel.<br /><br />But remember that as you fight over these words, others are establishing facts on the ground. Stalin took over the Soviet Union by staffing the bureaucracy with his underlings. Meanwhile Trotsky and Kamenev and Buhkarin debated the future of Socialism. It's not a mystery why the three Old Bolsheviks ended up dead.<br /><br />carlcarl jacobshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05195615264891904953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-84542806984683882372014-06-16T20:11:13.102+12:002014-06-16T20:11:13.102+12:00Hi Glen
The working party is not a 'ploy' ...Hi Glen<br />The working party is not a 'ploy' and I object to you describing as such on the grounds that Motion 30 is a recognition of the force of arguments of conservatives at GS. Were it not for that recognition then (from what I have heard) we would be talking about being much further down the track called 'church approves blessings.'<br />It is in the interests of all who love our church to allow the working party to work on the basis that they have a genuine task to accomplish.<br /><br />As for the situation in Auckland, it is not for me to comment directly on how the Bishop/bishops of Auckland are dealing with the application of the Motion in their diocese, but the general context in that diocese is different to (say) my own, for your synod has clearly indicated and by a strong margin that it is in favour of the blessings of same sex relationships.<br />Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-75769569741717932052014-06-16T20:06:22.868+12:002014-06-16T20:06:22.868+12:00Hi Ron,
Respectfully, you are missing the point.
O...Hi Ron,<br />Respectfully, you are missing the point.<br />Our constitution refers to the doctrine of Christ as explained in the BCP, Ordinal and the 39A.<br />Whether or not clergy sign up to adhering directly to the 39A, we all sign up to an understanding of the teaching of Christ which is represented through the 39A.<br />They cannot be dismissed. Nor should they be for they continue to offer brilliant insight into the gospel and continuing valid guidance on matters such as the sacraments, election and so forth.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-57337695694813194922014-06-16T19:32:58.163+12:002014-06-16T19:32:58.163+12:00Hi Peter, It is our concern that the working party...Hi Peter, It is our concern that the working party is just another ploy to drag the issue out,so that those who oppose Motion 30 will capitulate.At a meeting at St Michaels on Wed.4th June,we asked Bishop Ross:[1]What does "recognition",as per Motion 30 really mean?.He replied that "recognition"was a hard word to define.[2]Were the prayers which a vicar in North Auckland said Over a lesbian couple;prayers of affirmation or prayers of repentance?He replied that he did not know. But I thought that it could only occur at the request of the Vestry and with the permission of the Bishop.So,does he not know what he was giving permission for?.[3] How far can anyone, who is under submission to Gen.Synod go in making public statements before they breach Part C 14 of the Constitution?."No doctrines which are repugnant to the Doctrine and Sacraments of Christ as held and maintained by this Church shall be advocated or inculcated by nay person acknowledging the authority of Gen.Synod or with the use funds or property held under the authority of Gen.Synod".He replied,"I am not a lawyer".With the Commission on Doctrinal and Theological Questions wishing to rewrite the theology of the Church, we need to stand firm and not give them an inch.I have never heard any rational answer from them, as to how they can ever achieve their goal.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03140119419720500905noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-65935924537583958432014-06-16T19:21:42.612+12:002014-06-16T19:21:42.612+12:00If I may, Peter, in respect of Glen's opinion ...If I may, Peter, in respect of Glen's opinion that the 39 artifacts are any longer a defining doctrinal statement of modern Anglicanism; there being no requirement for our clergy to sign up specfically to their provenance; that ACANZP -or, at least, most of it - has moved beyond the restrictive ordinances of the 17th century Church of England.<br /><br />As others here imply, Holy Church is not merely a mausoleum for dead Saints, but. also a working hospital for alive and kicking Sinners.<br /><br />"New every morning is the love, our waking and uprising prove... NEW mercies, each returning day, hover around us when we pray. NEW perils past, NEW sins forgiven, NEW THOUGHTS OF GOD! NEW hopes of Heaven!<br /><br />Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit - One God, world without end. AMEN?<br /><br />Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-1446448529246918972014-06-16T15:36:17.731+12:002014-06-16T15:36:17.731+12:00Dear Commenters
Some robust comments have been mad...Dear Commenters<br />Some robust comments have been made.<br />Could we now focus, if further comments are to be made, on the state of our constitution and the declarations flowing from it ... treating these matters as serious matters at the heart of the integrity of our church.<br />If you think change can be made ... perhaps now is the time to lay out some mechanism for changing Fundamental Provisions which say they cannot be changed!Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-56405815945089862122014-06-16T14:53:58.063+12:002014-06-16T14:53:58.063+12:00Hi Primrose, you seem to be flowering out of seaso...Hi Primrose, you seem to be flowering out of season!<br />Your history lessons are interesting but please leave Bonnie Prince Charlie out of this one. My good old gaelic parents used to warn us as kids when we would not go to sleep, that the Campbells would come and get us.<br />However, none of this has got anything at all to do with the doctrine of the church here in New Zealand which is quite clearly defined in the first Fundamental Provision of the Constitution. And I ask Ron to quote me concrete examples of how the Church has ever redefined actions which the Word of God clearly states is not within His Will; as being acceptable.<br />Perhaps it is the liberal revionists who do not understand which the Church is. The second Recital of the Constitution states that the Church is One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic. The Church exists and has always existed for the purpose of proclaiming the proclamation of the Apostles. I query your remarks about doctrine which does not concern the nature of God as being open to developement. The 39 Articles would contradict that statement and in your Ordination Service the Presiding Bishop would have said, "Our authority is in Scripture and in the Church's continuing practices through the ages". <br />PLEASE tell me now the Word of God, spoken by the Eternally living Word can ever be out of touch with our present age?<br />Do you go concur with Bishop Jim White (Auckland) and the "Commission on Doctrinal and Theological questions" which he chaired - the report stated "(we are acutely aware in this part of the world that we need to forge theology that is not borne of the singular oppressive experience of patriarchal, white heterosexual men; we choose to priviledge the experience of the "other" - the outcaste and the stranger")?<br />Bishop Selwyn has made it quite clear that unlike the Anglican CHurch in England, the ACANZP was formed on the basis of a mutual and voluntary compact and anybody who does not like the doctrine of the fundamental provisions is free to move on".<br />I find it extremely offensive to be told about what I do and do not understand on this issue. If you wish to have an indepth conversation about the nature of same-sex desires; feel free to force this upon me. At this stage I have purposely stayed out of that debate. As we told one liberal vicar in Auckland, the only thing that was worse than his theology was his science and philosophy. <br />Primrose wishes to make postings about 16th century England, however, Ron our conversation on homosexuality would take you back into the teachings of Anaximander, the 2nd philosopher of the Milesian School. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03140119419720500905noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-58396523271693196392014-06-16T11:00:19.978+12:002014-06-16T11:00:19.978+12:00All understood, Michael.
And we may be a church (o...All understood, Michael.<br />And we may be a church (or set of churches) in which two opposing points of view are held for a period until one view predominates.<br /><br />I quite agree that it would be embarrassing to have a schism to which no one came. Most schisms I am aware of have taken place because laity and clergy together have felt strongly that departure on a matter of principle was important.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-24654962156965379872014-06-16T10:00:24.230+12:002014-06-16T10:00:24.230+12:00Hi Peter,
You state that
"The Nonjuror peri...Hi Peter,<br /><br />You state that<br /><br />"The Nonjuror period is not analogous in those terms because the political reality was one king of one line, and no chance of the other line coming back into being. Two opposing views could not be held together then."<br /><br />To simplify the history of the period somewhat, James II, the anointed king, was replaced by Parliament with William III and Mary II after the Glorious Revolution. For many years after 1688, there was always the constant threat of invasion by the Roman Catholic line of the House of Stuart, with the aid of Louis XIV of France and other Catholic Powers. <br /><br />The Rebellion of 1745, when the Young Pretender, "Bonnie Prince Charlie", the grandson of James II, landed in Scotland and marched south, was the last formal Jacobite invasion. There had, however, been strong, and traitorous support for the exiled line, by both Jacobites and Nonjurors, against the established Government of the day, both throughout that period, and well beyond the Rebellion of 1745. The "King Over The Water" is still toasted today in many sentimental circles, though I doubt there are many Nonjurors left around. <br /><br />It was quite possible for Juring and Nonjuring portions of the Church to co-exist within the Church in England for a considerable period of time. There were many, who preferring the comfort of their own establishments, were prepared to swear allegiance to the King, and Government in Possession, whilst still remaining loyal and more or less active for the King in Exile. The notorious Vicar of Bray belongs to this period.<br /><br />“The Illustrious House of Hanover,<br />And Protestant Succession,<br />To these I lustily will swear,<br />Whilst they can keep possession:<br />For in my Faith, and Loyalty,<br />I never once will faulter,<br />But George, my lawful king shall be,<br />Except the Times shou'd alter.<br />And this is law, I will maintain<br />Unto my Dying Day, Sir.<br />That whatsoever King may reign,<br />I will be the Vicar of Bray, Sir!”<br /><br />The case of the Nonjurors is, of course, not strictly analogous with case of the support for or against same gender marriage; no argument by analogy ever is. The case of the Nonjurors was raised to show what happens when a conservative wing of the Church of England decides, on a point of deeply held Principle, to separate itself from the main body of the Church. It illustrates, more importantly, that the vast majority of the lay portion of the Church did not follow those Nonjuring members of the clergy, including the Archbishop of Canterbury, who thought that retaining their principles was far more important than maintaining the unity of the Church.<br /><br />What I wished to point out, by reference to a split in the Church of England, was that there were dangers associated with leaving the Church on a point of Principle, when very few of the community of faith may actually follow you. You retain your Principles intact, but lose your congregation and become irrelevant.<br /><br />Rather than sad, I would think it would be extremely embarrassing to hold a Schism, and then discover that nobody came.<br /><br />Michael Primrose, ChristchurchMichael Primrosenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-43780614194958401602014-06-16T08:32:39.660+12:002014-06-16T08:32:39.660+12:00Hi Anonymous
Please give at least your first name ...Hi Anonymous<br />Please give at least your first name otherwise future comments may not be published.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-64717878561503389502014-06-16T08:19:33.975+12:002014-06-16T08:19:33.975+12:00Ron Smith remarks: "Concerning Glen's rem...Ron Smith remarks: "Concerning Glen's remark; what he seems to not understand, is that doctrine about anything other than the nature of God's-Self (today being Trinity Sunday) may be liable to development - on the basis of pastoral accommodation."<br /><br />What a confused and historically uninformed comment to make, and of all days on Trinity Sunday!<br />Is Mr Smith not aware that most of the Church was Arian in the Fourth Century and much of it into the Fifth? Trinitarianism was a minority view that only supplanted Arianism slowly and with great difficulty.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-64248053057312503542014-06-16T07:03:08.170+12:002014-06-16T07:03:08.170+12:00Hi Rhys,
I think I am asking whether our church ca...Hi Rhys,<br />I think I am asking whether our church can "intellectually define itself" so that a variety of positions on the will of God can be held together.<br /><br />I don't think I am saying this is certain but I think it reasonable to have high hopes at the beginning of the working group's life.<br /><br />I am hesitant to lay down a hostage to fortune by stating now under which circumstances I feel I could not continue to be a licensed clergyperson (because, in the end, the precise circumstances might turn out to be different, but people are liable to claim "But you said ..."). Nevertheless I think I could say that areas of significant concern for me personally (and, as I listen, for others) include:<br />- doctrine of marriage (will it be constrained towards a man and a woman only?)<br />- what our Formularies consist of<br />- what our Fundamentals consist of.<br /><br />But you also use the word "irreformable" and that raises an interesting question of whether one stays with a church as an institution which reforms itself in a disagreeable direction. Can one imagine it reforming itself at a future point in an agreeable direction? If the answer is 'Yes' should one stay? <br /><br />From that perspective I am always interested in the question whether our church - whatever decisions it is making - continues to provide a home for evangelicals who value the English Reformation, the theology of the BCP and the 39A, as well as the eucharistic prayer on p. 436 of NZPB. As I best understand Motion 30, at this point our church is saying it wishes to provide that home ...Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-21497197906903698212014-06-16T06:54:17.646+12:002014-06-16T06:54:17.646+12:00Hi Michael,
A lot depends on whether your analogy ...Hi Michael,<br />A lot depends on whether your analogy to the Nonjuror situation applies today. Or, perhaps, how it applies ... in general terms, yes, the church, any church looks pretty silly when it never changes relative to changing society. But in the specific terms of the present situation, the question I am mainly addressing is whether two opposing points of view can be held within the one body ecclesiastical.<br /><br />The Nonjuror period is not analogous in those terms because the political reality was one king of one line, and no chance of the other line coming back into being. Two opposing views could not be held together then.<br /><br />But, in our day, we seem to be able to hold together, say, monarchists and republicans. But that analogy is not that excellent either!Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-5603138047551243642014-06-16T06:44:05.744+12:002014-06-16T06:44:05.744+12:00Peter, I fear you are looking for a degree of perf...Peter, I fear you are looking for a degree of perfection in human affairs that is not our to have. How could a complex human institution intellectually define itself with such perfection as to conform absolutely to the will of God? There will always the need for personal judgment about the allegiance we should give to an organisation. I say that having once resigned from a union on a point of principle. I guess if we judge something irreformable then we should go; but is that a judgment you would make about ANZCAP? RhysAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-66229578691632130802014-06-15T22:45:35.006+12:002014-06-15T22:45:35.006+12:00Hi Peter,
Father Ron Smith conjures, in horrifyin...Hi Peter,<br /><br />Father Ron Smith conjures, in horrifying contrast, a vision of a Church, which never has the possibility, nor even the potential, to evolve in its understanding of the nature of the message, with which it has been entrusted. A Church that exists in constant, unchanging, doctrinal certitude; idées en gelée.<br /><br />What would it be like, to sit in some Carolinian stasis, where the Divine Right of Kings was preached to a contented congregation, whilst outside Reality was reaching for the stars and facing questions that were undreamt of in our philosophies?<br /><br />The Church would be a theme park of antiquated attitudes and curious ceremonies, where tourists would come to gaze with amazement at the noble architecture of our buildings and to smile, somewhat condescendingly, at our old fashioned ways.<br /><br />Fortunately, the Church does find an increase in its Wisdom with the Ages. What it thought as a child is not that which it speaks, thinks or reasons in its maturity.<br /><br />Father Ron Smith offers a choice between a dynamic, living Church that can offer answers to today, or one, that is set in glass case, already ready and preserved for future display in some Museum of Beliefs.<br /><br />We all face that choice, as difficult as it may well prove, choosing which sort of Church we would prefer to belong to.<br /><br />Michael Primrose, Christchurch Michael Primrosenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-38728989434148625642014-06-15T19:34:05.882+12:002014-06-15T19:34:05.882+12:00Concerning Glen's remark; what he seems to not...Concerning Glen's remark; what he seems to not understand, is that doctrine about anything other than the nature of God's-Self (today being Trinity Sunday) may be liable to development - on the basis of pastoral accommodation.<br /><br />Thus it may be that at any time, provisions may be considered pastorally expedient. Such new development has been part and parcel of our Church in the past - and may reasonably be expected to take place in the future. This is completely in accord with a dynamic, Spirit-led ecclesial community.<br /><br />Clergy whose spiritual journey is closed to such development must never have properly understood the nature of the Church - which is ever open new understanding of the power of God's redeeming grace to raise up the lowly, the marginalised and despised of the world. It is part of our fallen human nature to covet security and the comfort of doctrinal certitude- a certitude that Jesus took great pains to shatter in his own faith community.<br /><br />"My ways are not your ways, nor my thoughts, your thoughts".<br /><br />"Come, Holy Spirit, re-kindle with your Church the fire of God's love". AMEN!Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.com