The Looming of Daftness
I read the Telegraph on the interview with the AB of York and I humbly come away scratching my head with utter disappointment in its tone and what appears to be an absence of clear thinking. His words seem to undermine Windsor and the theology behind the Covenant and I am confused as to why he would make such statements in the fragile situation we find ourselves in. Ecclesiologically, I have a number of issues with these statements and some of them seem a bit daft to be honest.
If the Covenant and Windsor (the only games in town in my opinion) are not given the freedom to take their course without making threatening comments from the Mother Church then it is dead in the water before it even begins. This sort of thing seems to be a dare to the GS Primates to take the step of boycotting Lambeth 08 if they want to be out of the Communion. It has complete disregard for the process that we have entered. It's the American church doing the harm, not these GS leaders. Does this come as an authoritative threat or is it simply ++Sentamu's personal opinion? A threat that strong towards the American church for its 2003 actions has never been made. This is not to even mention the recent ridiculous statement by the Abp of Armagh who said that schism is worse than heresy. What does that say about the Church Councils and the authority given them to determine heresy? Why then doesn't the Abp of Armagh rejoin Rome if that is his opinion because if he really believed it then he would be in sin to remain an Anglican? Maybe the next headline will read "The Abp of Armagh enrolls in RCIA classes to reunite the Anglican Church in Ireland with Rome."
If the Covenant and Windsor (the only games in town in my opinion) are not given the freedom to take their course without making threatening comments from the Mother Church then it is dead in the water before it even begins. This sort of thing seems to be a dare to the GS Primates to take the step of boycotting Lambeth 08 if they want to be out of the Communion. It has complete disregard for the process that we have entered. It's the American church doing the harm, not these GS leaders. Does this come as an authoritative threat or is it simply ++Sentamu's personal opinion? A threat that strong towards the American church for its 2003 actions has never been made. This is not to even mention the recent ridiculous statement by the Abp of Armagh who said that schism is worse than heresy. What does that say about the Church Councils and the authority given them to determine heresy? Why then doesn't the Abp of Armagh rejoin Rome if that is his opinion because if he really believed it then he would be in sin to remain an Anglican? Maybe the next headline will read "The Abp of Armagh enrolls in RCIA classes to reunite the Anglican Church in Ireland with Rome."
posted by Fr. Jeffrey at 4:48 PM
O God, most glorious, most bountiful, accept, we humbly beseech thee, our praises and thanksgivings for thy holy Catholic Church, the mother of us all who bear the name of Christ; for the faith which it hath conveyed in safety to our time, and the mercies by which it hath enlarged and comforted the souls of men; for the virtues which it hath established upon earth, and the holy lives by which it glorifieth both the world and thee; to whom, O blessed Trinity (+), be ascribed all honour, might, majesty and dominion, now and for ever. Amen.
3 Comments:
As for 'reuniting the Anglican church in Ireland with Rome':
(1) the Church of Ireland PRECEDED the Anglican Church (St Columba, St Patrick, St Bridget et al.); (2) the Celtic Church was ALWAYS independent on Rome until the Council of Whitby (date escapes me), when they were strong-armed into capitulation to Rome. Not much authentic apostolic succession here. Note also that the Church of Ireland had women priests DECADES before the C of E.
Food for thought?
John
You are seemingly confusing the issue with pastoral practice and treatment of those with whom you disagree. My conscience is very clear on the issue itself and if the Anglican Communion made a declaration that these present actions of TEC are in perfect accord with Holy Scripture then I would have to search my conscience about remaining an Anglican.
But, that does not mean I treat people who believe this to be right as if I despise them. Charity demands I love even my greatest enemies. So, my conscience is CLEAR John and my actions consistent with my conscience and pastoral practice.
Is there anything else I need to do?
"(2) the Celtic Church was ALWAYS independent on Rome until the Council of Whitby"
This version of history is a little discredited - and has been for many years (even as a patriotic Welshman I admit this).
It is any case irrelevant. The so-called "celtic churches" were never in schism, always in full communion with Rome and the other patriarchal sees, so Fr Jeffrey's argument still stands.
"Not much authentic apostolic succession here."
Ehh?? What does this mean? Is J.S. suggesting that "celtic" bishops were not in the apostolic succession?
Post a Comment
<< Home