Senior bishops have raised the prospect of asking the Queen to dissolve the Church of England’s ‘Parliament’, the General Synod, if it continues to oppose the creation of women bishops.Read the rest here.
The unprecedented proposal was made in a confidential meeting chaired by the Archbishop of Canterbury last week and reflects Church leaders’ frustration with the Synod for narrowly defeating legislation in November to allow women priests to become bishops.
The House of Bishops unveiled fresh plans on Friday to push through the historic reforms within two years and is preparing for a battle with traditionalists.
The Terrible, Troubling Test
1 day ago
9 comments:
And this is why I chose the door. It won't end until everyone have been assimilated into the Anglican borg collective.
The Anglicans have compromised the catholic faith with Protestantism. It is no surprise that they continue to decide matters by compromise. It is encouraging that so many in the Synod oppose women bishops, but the line in the sand is draw too late.
Heterodoxy goes hand-in-hand with moral weakness. There's a similar dynamic in politics, where progressives happily alter the rules of the game whenever advantageous. The small-o orthodox need to recognise that their opponents are never going to respect procedural rules or notions of fair play when inconvenient. We, on the other hand, are bound by the need to act virtuously.
I used to be pretty much a liberal leftie when it came to ecumenical matters. At least, I would be prepared to talk with people from any of the denominations and work hard at finding areas of commonality.
Of late, perhaps through exhaustion, my attitude has become more and more hardline. I am still more than happy to speak of the Orthodox Christian faith to anyone who shows an interest, and I take care always to be polite to everyone - especially those with whom I am at odds. But the Protestant denominations in particular (I'm still marginally hopeful about the Roman Catholics) seem hell-bent on morphing into some sort of civic "religion of nice" that bares nothing but a superficial resemblance to the faith received from the Apostles. I do not seek to morally censure or to lay blame: the beam in my eye is far too big for that. But there are Orthodox theologians who are doubtful of referring to Protestants as Christians, and I am beginning to come around to their point of view. It is getting to the point - perhaps it is already past the point - where it would be more helpful and honest for all concerned to treat such bodies the same way we treat non-Christian religions.
Actually, now I think about it... I am a part-time chaplain in an institution with a number of other part-time chaplains. I mainly look after the spiritual needs of Orthodox, but I also do general chaplaincy work. I get on MUCH better with the Muslim and Pagan chaplains than I do with the Anglican, Methodist and Baptist ones. I think that this is because the Muslim and Pagan chaplains do not try to finesse every theological discussion with "well, we're just like you really"...
Perhaps I'm just becoming an intolerant old man. I must seek guidance from my spiritual father.
Fr Dcn Paul,
Part of the problem is the notion that there is a coherent religious identity called "Protestant." The term covers such a wide range of belief and practice as to be virtually useless. Even narrowing it down to historical categories such as "Presbyterian," "Baptist," and "Lutheran" is not that helpful, since there is a wide range of commitment (or lack thereof) to the basic truths of the historic Christian faith within these classic denominational families.
Nevertheless, there do remain some "Protestants" who respect the authority of Scripture and can (and do) confess the Nicene Creed without having their fingers crossed. With such Protestants I should hope the Orthodox can have friendly relations.
You are correct of course, Chris. There are also countless individuals in those groupings who live a holier life than this miserable sinner.
I wonder whether part of the problem also is that Protestants in general (to use the term very loosely as an umbrella) simply do not have the same understanding of what it means to be in communion with their bishops as do Orthodox Christians. A case in point is the recent teaching of Mrs Jefferts-Schori; I had a discussion about this with an Anglican chaplain the other day, who thought that it was simply appalling. He was outraged that this should come from the mind of any catechised Christian, still less a member of the clergy, and even less a bishop. But the same chaplain said he would have no problem receiving communion from her or serving with her at the altar because (and I quote) "that isn't the same thing as preaching bad theology". I'm not always at a loss for words, but I was on that occasion.
Protestants in general ... simply do not have the same understanding of what it means to be in communion with their bishops as do Orthodox Christians.
I think this is right. I don't think anybody takes the notion of "being in communion with" as seriously as Orthodox do -- not even Roman Catholics. Roman Catholics have the same doctrine "on paper" that Orthodox do, that "you are who you are in communion with." But in practice being in communion with one's own bishop, and the bonds of communion between bishops, are trumped by being in communion with the Pope. Some bishop (even one's own) may be wandering off the reservation in doctrine or practice, but if he hasn't screwed up enough to be out of communion with the Pope, it is not really a problem.
Among Protestants those with an attitude closest to the Orthodox (on this issue) are the confessional Lutherans, including my own Lutheran Church -- Missouri Synod. We practice closed communion, and are in communion with only those Churches who fully agree with us in doctrine.
Even among us, sadly, not all congregations are as strict in their communion discipline as they ought to be. But at least in principle, the standard for Church unity is full agreement in the faith, manifested by communion in the sacraments.
Interesting. Thank you, Chris. I must read more about the Missouri Synod.
Yes, good sir, the voting must continue, and once a vote has been won by the progressives, anyone not willing to accept the victory as permanent, is told that the debate has been settled and to "move on."
Post a Comment