tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post5527496468330410636..comments2024-03-24T15:19:06.377-04:00Comments on The Continuum: Pearl dustFr. Robert Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comBlogger55125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-40616569007503784142009-12-31T03:21:47.669-05:002009-12-31T03:21:47.669-05:00Charles wrote, "But the St. Louis Affirmation...Charles wrote, "But the St. Louis Affirmation says, Section V, 'The continuing Anglicans remain in full communion with the See of Canterbury and with all other faithful parts of the Anglican Communion, and should actively seek similar relations with all other Apostolic and Catholic Churches, provided that agreement in the essentials of Faith and Order first be reached.'"<br /><br />Had he read the text of the Affirmation as published on the ACC's homepage, he had seen the following gloss inserted at the critical point:<br /><br />"We affirm our continued relations of communion with the See of Canterbury and all faithful parts of the Anglican Communion. [Note: Because of the action of General Synod of the Church of England, Parliament, and the Royal Assent, the College of Bishops of the Anglican Catholic Church is obliged no longer to count the See of Canterbury as a faithful part of the Anglican Communion.]"<br /><br />In plain English, ever since the then-Presiding Bishop of PECUSA went home from the 1977 Congress of St. Louis and asked the Archbishop of Canterbury to ignore the new, orthodox Anglican presence in North America, this portion of the Affirmation has been the mere expression of an aspiration that was destined never to attain reality.<br /><br />The C of E's own adoption of women's "ordination", and the toleration of that change by the rest of the official Lambeth Communion, just amounted to erecting a cairn over a coffin that had already been laid in its grave and a grave that had already been back filled.<br /> <br />With the benefit of hindsight, we now know that the post-1977 Lambeth Communion would not tolerate a truly orthodox, traditional approach to Anglicanism.<br /><br />John A. Hollister+John A. Hollisterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01325615323834517909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-19892341574533541762009-12-22T15:01:21.889-05:002009-12-22T15:01:21.889-05:00Methinks I may have been a little clumsy in speaki...Methinks I may have been a little clumsy in speaking from separating from sin as I did.<br /><br />The ordination of women makes post-ordination of women ordinations and therefore sacraments null and void, excepting baptism. <br /><br />I do wonder in what we we are in communion with Canterbury today? We do commemorate him in the liturgy, and we attend no Lambeth Councils or any other Canterbury Communion event that denotes remaining in communion.<br /><br />I agree with the sentiment that we have a duty to tell the plain truth to the ACNA about the folly of this path they have gone down, just as creating another Anglican jurisdiction in North America, when Bishop Duncan and the others had so many choices as to where they could have been was plain wrong.<br /><br />The US continuum from the far left of the ACNA to the jurisdictions on the right like the Christ the King folks ignore the rest of the world effectively. <br /><br />The ACC has a diocesan presence on all continents, including 100 priests and thousands of faithful in the Sudan of all places, retains the Church of India, Pakistan, Burma and Ceylon, and is found in many former places of the English diaspora - Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. It is to that Church that I urge the ACNA to join and to abandon the liberalism of women's orders for communion with those who walked away from ECUSA's madness thirty years ago.Deacon Down Underhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14903366446394957630noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-43104644824568424692009-12-22T14:13:27.657-05:002009-12-22T14:13:27.657-05:00I think I finally understand ACC ecumencial strate...I think I finally understand ACC ecumencial strategy. <br /><br />The ACC will outmaneuver both Rome and ACNA#2 upon autocephalous recognition by ROCOR. After ACNA#2 splits up, an 'orthodoxy' recognized by other (starting with ROCOR) branch churches, plus the stability gained through ACC canons and growth, will be a strong pull for ACNA departing churches. <br /><br />Great strategy. But the problem I have with it is in order to convince ROCOR of further 'orthodoxy' our theology as expressed in the Articles and even prayer book has to undergo a change. <br /><br />In winning external recognition vis-a-vis other Apostolic and Catholic sister communions (i.e., the orthodox), I tend to think we risk loosing our theology. Probably many disagree with this assessment, but that is because we might not really like the Anglican (reformed catholic) Settlement to begin with. I've read the new bcp which is the product of english-orthodox communications as well as speeches by persons regarding the goodwill of Metro Hilarion, so I know I am not delirious. I expect some ACC clergy to stick firm to the Settlement while others have long been alienated from it and will welcome any affinity to modern Orthodoxy. <br /><br />I don't see the same threat with ACNA, after all it provisions a 'local option', but that doesn't mean ACNA path is without hardship and much trouble. There are factions (that ACC could tip the scales). But it's these same parties adn difficulties which drives off Anglo-Catholics who have suffered long to get to the happy place of the ACC. They do not want to go back or repeat it. <br /><br />Nonetheless, I believe our theology, as Anglicanism has classically defined catholicism, is at stake.charleshttp://www.anglicanrose.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-8074871336291831382009-12-22T12:51:35.194-05:002009-12-22T12:51:35.194-05:00There's a very real difference between talking...There's a very real difference between talking to heretics and being in communion with them.<br /><br />We MUST do the former, and CANNOT do the latter. That's why we are Continuers. However, non-communion does not excuse us from making every effort to draw the erring back to the truth. That we must do.<br /><br />edpoetreaderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11613032927883843078noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-3073857964075059112009-12-22T10:31:17.715-05:002009-12-22T10:31:17.715-05:00Dear David,
You said, "One cannot be in com...Dear David, <br /><br />You said, "One cannot be in communion, to share the Body and Blood of Our Lord with heretics and schismatics." <br /><br />But the St. Louis Affirmation says, Section V, "The continuing Anglicans remain in full communion with the See of Canterbury and with all other faithful parts of the Anglican Communion, and should actively seek similar relations with all other Apostolic and Catholic Churches, provided that agreement in the essentials of Faith and Order first be reached."<br /><br />While things have changed, and Canterbury is lost, the Affirmation still says we are to "actively seek similar relations with all other Apostolic and Catholic churches". I imagine, as Fr. Taristano outlined, a 'church' may be provincial, a diocese, or single parish? Regardless, how does proactive dialogue equal communio in sacris?<br /><br />Also, I don't think we left Canterbury because sin exists in the church. That would be donatist-anabaptism. It's because the sacrament was overthrown by changing the necessary signs associated with Orders. ?<br /><br />Anyway, when it comes to ecumenicalism, where and when it does, the Affirmation mandates our vision. There is no harm in talking to bishops, proactively, who disagree with WO and have already separated from TEC. I still believe the Continuum could tip the scales in ACNA. But, I also understand why many don't want the headache of fighting big battles when ACC just achieved some relative quiet and stability. What I think was a missed opportunity was not engaging ACNA in the manner AB Jonah did-- i.e., critically and non-committed.charleshttp://www.anglicanrose.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-39394066416393686872009-12-22T08:07:17.205-05:002009-12-22T08:07:17.205-05:00John Hollister is very correct regarding holy orde...John Hollister is very correct regarding holy orders and the ACNA. One cannot be in communion, to share the Body and Blood of Our Lord with heretics and schismatics. Such erroneous belief or conduct excludes one from the altar.<br /><br />Those who remain in communion with Rowan Williams even if they fully disagree with the ordination of women or homosexuals in the TEC by by maintaining communion with the TEC implicitly share in these things and therefore share in the sin.<br /><br />If you are against the ordination of women, you have no place in a Church which readily accepts this, like the ACNA.Deacon Down Underhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14903366446394957630noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-4884253423609406202009-12-21T22:57:58.443-05:002009-12-21T22:57:58.443-05:00Thank you Fr. Hart. I am glad to get this reaffirm...Thank you Fr. Hart. I am glad to get this reaffirmed as often as possible. I don't hear it much unless on this blog. Really appreciate the confirmation.<br /><br />"The sight of genuine Catholicism through the Anglican lense is persuasive, whereas the other lenses are quite apparently less clear and in need of cleansing. They are better than no lenses, but not as clear as the Anglican ones."charleshttp://www.anglicanrose.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-55393694205702994002009-12-21T22:08:41.521-05:002009-12-21T22:08:41.521-05:00Charles wrote, after discussing these issues with ...Charles wrote, after discussing these issues with some REC acquaintences, "presently the church has left WO a local option while universally prohibiting future consecrations of women to the bishopric."<br /><br />But how can a church group approve the ordination of women to the "diaconate" and the "priesthood" -- and "local option" is, assuredly, such approval -- and then turn around and ban them from the "episcopate"?<br /><br />Holy Orders are one sacrament, so the same fundamental requirements apply to each of its three grades or steps. Thus the exclusion of women from one of those grades, but not the other two, says very plainly: "Women are actually eligible to receive Holy Orders but they aren't quite good enough to receive the plenitude of them".<br /><br />I would think every single woman in the ACNA, even if she does not in fact approve of women's "ordination", would walk out of that organization as soon as she learned of this degrading, unprincipled policy. I know my mother would have -- and she was no 1970s-style "feminist", either.<br /><br />John A. Hollister+<br />"nolywe"John A. Hollisterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01325615323834517909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-40622802019007453102009-12-21T21:57:56.613-05:002009-12-21T21:57:56.613-05:00Charles wrote, "Dear Fr. Hollister, Please cl...Charles wrote, "Dear Fr. Hollister, Please clarify this statement: 'the Eastern Orthodox are far closer to us in their view of the Faith -- and especially in their views on Holy Tradition, authority in the Church, and the sacramental meaning of apostolic succession....'"<br /><br />What I meant was that at least the St. Louis Continuing Anglicans (I cannot speak with assurance about anyone else who claims the "C.C." label) and the Eastern Orthodox regard Holy Scripture as containing the record of a special inspired Revelation from God, and, where, rarely, that text does not seem to speak with inherent clarity, also regard Holy Tradition as the lens through which that text is to be interpreted.<br /><br />ACNA #2 quite clearly has rather different views. Obviously, those who entertain revisionist views to the point that they are willing to resort to "ordaining" women do not have the same concepts of the inspiration of Scripture and the Church's hermeneutic apparatus as we and the E.O.s do. However, what is often overlooked is that neither do those who, while they do not "ordain" women themselves, are willing to subsist within an organization that does so. (Just recall Abp. Duncan's recent multiple "ordination" held just prior to the ACNA's most recent beanfest, in a small memorial of Graham Leonard's parting gesture to the Church of England).<br /><br />The whole concept of "intercommunion" between two parties means that each partner accepts and adopts the purportedly sacramental acts of the other as though they were his own. Thus, for example, the relationship between the Church of Nigeria and the Church of Rwanda is a bit like that between an overindulgent partygoer and the careful soul who drives him home. The latter pair has a "designated driver", the former has a "designated apostate".<br /><br />Both, however, went to the party.<br /><br />So, for us, and despite the deep cultural differences between us and the E.O.s, they at least have views that are similar to ours regarding some very fundamental issues, where the Pittsburghers (a) neither view those issues as fundamental nor (b) see them in the same way we do. <br /><br />John A. Hollister+<br />"coradig"John A. Hollisterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01325615323834517909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-75355455813148302009-12-20T22:38:03.139-05:002009-12-20T22:38:03.139-05:00Charles:
The only safe road is "scripture as...Charles:<br /><br /><i>The only safe road is "scripture as interpreted by catholicism, as interpreted by Anglican settlement". Is this a fair approach?</i><br /><br />In fact, it is what we do. The sight of genuine Catholicism through the Anglican lense is persuasive, whereas the other lenses are quite apparently less clear and in need of cleansing. They are better than no lenses, but not as clear as the Anglican ones. <br /><br />When you learned about the ACNA "local option" for WO, I trust you saw why we keep some necessary distance. I hope we may persuade them, but must protect our own churches in the process, so that they hold to the standard you have described.<br /><br /><i>Feminism in the church leads to feminization of the home.</i><br /><br />And, vice-versa.Fr. Robert Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-40313230487668609022009-12-20T01:30:30.993-05:002009-12-20T01:30:30.993-05:00Last thought:
Also, sister branches, RC and EO, ...Last thought: <br /><br />Also, sister branches, RC and EO, have proven amazing and contemporary counter-weights to innovation with Orders. Not too little can be accredited to them.<br /><br />Feminism in the church leads to feminization of the home.charleshttp://www.anglicanrose.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-77425886520291900632009-12-20T01:18:38.574-05:002009-12-20T01:18:38.574-05:00PS. I think I've missed something on Stand Fir...PS. I think I've missed something on Stand Firm. I don't really know what it's like dealing with evangelicals. Probably if I did, I have more sympathy for keeping a distance to them. Perhaps I've idealized the ACNA#2 a bit, and after learning about the present constitution, I don't see how a local option solves much. It may all come down to which seminaries priests are sent/drawn from. At best it is 'status quo'. My hope was continuers could tip the scales against more liberal evangelicals. <br />There is still a process to play out. I guess people just don't have the bandwidth to endure the headaches of such an upcoming conflict. Nonetheless, I am sadden when parishes go the other way, rejecting anything fishy of protestantism. I guess it's worth being optimistic, saying things are better than twenty years ago. Pro-active dialogue is always good.charleshttp://www.anglicanrose.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-58682707540232618482009-12-20T01:09:47.665-05:002009-12-20T01:09:47.665-05:00Thank you for the comments.
Today I spoke to som...Thank you for the comments. <br /><br />Today I spoke to some REC friends to get an update on their situation. <br /><br />I was wrong on a couple things. While a process may be ongoing regarding WO, presently the church has left WO a local option while universally prohibiting future consecrations of women to the bishopric. So, the constitution is further along than I thought. While there are constituent members who are firmly against all WO, even to the deaconate, it is a hodgepodge and territorial dioceses have to be worked out. <br /><br />As a man planning marriage and a family, I would loathe a priest teaching matriarchy and feminism. Not only this, I also admit how frustrating it is to argue male orders to 'evangelicals' who will not admit their own cultural presuppositions brought to scripture. In otherwords, their own tradition. <br /><br />Here, I see the importance of catholic bearing on scripture. Often innovation is based on flimsy scriptural evidence, and if catholic tradition is ignored, many disorders can be rationalized. <br /><br />What I come away with in these conversatiosn is a new sense to three reinforcing truths: <br /><br />1. scripture where and when plain reading is possible. <br /><br />2. catholicism (five centuries, four councils plus those that agree) as stated in 1571 canons and in the Henrican 10 articles preamble. <br /><br />3. traditional anglican formularies as the correct and best interpretation of both scripture and catholicism, as received by the CofE. <br /><br />I've been harping on scripture and formularies, but I know see how important an appeal to catholicity is. Reformed Catholicism of the 16th and 17th centuries did not anticipate the apostasy of the 21st century..! <br /><br />I also agree the ACC has gained a stability that ACNA will likely have to work toward. Nonetheless, my heart is with Anglicanism not Eastern Orthodoxy, and I'd prefer a movement toward the former for the sake or as a means of reaffirming our own articles, bcp, and other formularies. I think without them, 'catholicism' and 'orthodoxy' become loaded terms because accompanying them often are 'accretions' belonging to medieval and modern times, smuggled through by liturgy or hagiography, etc.. <br /><br />I kind of sense similar muddiness with the evangelical approach. The only safe road is "scripture as interpreted by catholicism, as interpreted by Anglican settlement". Is this a fair approach?charleshttp://www.anglicanrose.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-50831869843636172592009-12-19T22:58:20.070-05:002009-12-19T22:58:20.070-05:00I was finally banned at the "Stand Firm"...<i>I was finally banned at the "Stand Firm" web site for making the offer to someone via a post. One of their web masters actually ask for people to help in the Atlanta area, and then banned me for making the offer.</i><br /><br />That's them all over. I think a special set of rooms in some psychiatric ward needs to be permanently reserved for that crowd. If they work at it, they may actually ban every reader they have within the year-a resolution for them to consider.<br /><br />Charles:<br /><br />You seem to suggest formal discussion with the ACNA that gets around the man they call their Archbishop, Robert Duncan. It simply cannot be done. If so, it would be discussion with individuals who are ending their affiliation with the ACNA, in which case they may consider joining us. <br /><br />Right now we are the Continuing Anglicans rallying around Classic Anglicanism, and refusing the Tiber Swim, so the ACNA has not been on center stage. But, I think we have not forgotten them.Fr. Robert Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-26600204068984316392009-12-19T16:11:57.957-05:002009-12-19T16:11:57.957-05:00Charles,
Your posting explicitly implies that the...Charles,<br /><br />Your posting explicitly implies that the ACC is insular and stand offish. It also assumes that ANCA#2 would welcome an approach from the ACC. By my experience you are wrong in both the first and second instances.<br /><br />On various web sites I have offered the use of my church building to any group leaving the Episcopal Church, with no strings attached. I have made this offer repeatedly when people in the Atlanta area posted about wanting to leave the Episcopal Church. I was finally banned at the "Stand Firm" web site for making the offer to someone via a post. One of their web masters actually ask for people to help in the Atlanta area, and then banned me for making the offer.<br /><br />I have never had even a nibble of interest from any group, or any individual. My belief is that they are afraid of being absorbed by us. You seem to think that we are a pretty insecure bunch. I don't know what jurisdiction you are in, but the ACC I know and love is not dependent on any one personality. We are held together by a common set of attitudes, beliefs,and shared experiences. There is no cult of personality in the ACC.<br /><br />I suggest that it is not we who have been stand offish, but others who have held us at arms length because they fear our internal unity and the gravity that it exerts.<br /><br />The ACC is a Church at peace with itself. We say, half jokingly, "We finally have the Church we always wanted."Fr. Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18097549748468739701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-68749733994085876322009-12-19T14:27:31.473-05:002009-12-19T14:27:31.473-05:00In reference to whether we should or should not se...In reference to whether we should or should not seek communion with, or fellowship with the ACNA, I believe we cannot do so until there is clarity about what they stand for. Some favor women priests, many favor women deacons, and all of them show a lack of understanding of more than 30 years now of continuing Catholic Anglicanism in the US and now the wider world.<br /><br />The bottom line is that there was no need to set up the ACNA. They needed to approach the ACC,or one of it's sister churches and seek unity with those Anglicans who have national and international jurisdiction and provinces and whose fidelity to Anglicanism cannot be challenged.<br /><br />The ACNA is on the edge of becoming PECUSA/ECUSA/TEC and I suspect it will implode because they have got the fundamentals of ministry wrong.Deacon Down Underhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14903366446394957630noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-56685472610853103562009-12-19T14:22:57.990-05:002009-12-19T14:22:57.990-05:00In regard to the issue of a married episcopate, my...In regard to the issue of a married episcopate, my appeal to the more than a millennium of Eastern Orthodox discipline - not dogma in this matter is that it offers the Church the capacity to have bishops with the charism of ascetic renunciation.Granted married men can be ascetics also, and granted married bishops in the main have worked for us.Arguably in these days non non-stipendiary clergy, and everywhere being a frontline mission field, ascetic renunciation of worldly pleasures and distractions is something to reflect on.<br /><br />In this age of disposable marriages many priests and not a few bishops have renounced marriage vows and then remarried, something I believe to be a challenge to the order and discipline of the Church that raises a question mark over their understanding of the sacrament of marriage and it's relationship to their clerical vows. Again, in Orthodoxy, married priests become celibate priests on the death of a spouse or their separation.<br /><br />But in all these things prayer, charity and an understanding of our common spiritual frailty is required.Deacon Down Underhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14903366446394957630noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-89044824600570683292009-12-19T12:36:31.143-05:002009-12-19T12:36:31.143-05:00Dear Fr. Hart,
Perhaps a proposal will come arou...Dear Fr. Hart, <br /><br />Perhaps a proposal will come around. When it does let's just keep Bp. Duncan and co. off the list. My point is not to lump the anti-WO and pro-WO men together, upholding our end of section V as plainly read. etc.charleshttp://www.anglicanrose.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-82862807641255885792009-12-19T12:32:57.037-05:002009-12-19T12:32:57.037-05:00Dear Fr. Hollister,
Please clarify this statemen...Dear Fr. Hollister, <br /><br />Please clarify this statement:<br /> <br />"the Eastern Orthodox are far closer to us in their view of the Faith -- and especially in their views on Holy Tradition, authority in the Church, and the sacramental meaning of apostolic succession..."<br /><br /> What is the relation between scripture and tradition? Reformed Catholicism and the East are very different here. We might say 'seven sacraments', 'seven councils' but that's after some pretty serious qualifications I doubt the Orthodox would agree with. Moreover, the East does not stop here but have important medieval and modern councils which they will not compromise, as AB Jonah proved at Beford. If we've thrown prima/sola scriptura out the door, then perhaps we really aren't Anglican aside from 'ornament'? We offer the most beautiful mass in English?charleshttp://www.anglicanrose.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-82796523046350575782009-12-19T12:22:56.033-05:002009-12-19T12:22:56.033-05:00I do not recall any proposal for public or formal ...I do not recall any proposal for public or formal discussion. But, that is not the only kind.Fr. Robert Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-51214550039833206602009-12-19T12:17:57.524-05:002009-12-19T12:17:57.524-05:00Dear Fr. Hart,
I suppose I'd like to see an ...Dear Fr. Hart, <br /><br />I suppose I'd like to see an ecumenicalism with the emerging ACNA #2 which is more 'pro-active', more like our relation with the ROCOR where we take the initiative to reach out and invite friendly ACNA bishops to our synods (or vice-versa). The assumption, so far, is there are no 'orthodox' bishops or clergy in ACNA. This is wrong. The second assumption is the ACC & co. have more in common with the Russian orthodox than conservative, anti-WO, evangelical Anglicans. You have already called this something of a 'miracle', beyond our imagination.<br /><br />Furthermore, the ACNA is a process, not fiat accompli. The other constituent members are still engage in negotiations over the constitution and final canons regarding ordination. Members like REC have said they are ready to leave Duncan behind if WO is not excluded, giving the process two years to work. So, let's not jump the gun, and lump all bishops and ACNA clergy as pro-WO. This is somewhat defamatory in my opinion.<br /><br />ACNA as a process is an important point. First, rules regarding WO have yet to be determined. Second, Duncan speaks for a minority amongst the total number of bishops. We ought to apply some perspective here. <br /><br />When continuers left in 77, exodus was demanded by the the absolute instransigence of the ECUSA clergy. But today, at least in the ACNA, the ratio of conservatives to liberals is altogether different. There is an internal, critical debate taking place over the non-desirability of WO. <br /><br />What I find tragic is when continuers are given an opportunity to win a fight they lost over thirty years ago, we voluntarily 'disengage'. Rather than throw our noticeable weight in with our own patrimony: anti-WO's in ACNA #2: we worry about being 'contanimated', but then make a hard turn toward ROCOR. Yet ROCOR is not only 'foreign' (rejecting Reformed Catholicism altogether) but less viable (as you have said yourself). It cannot be 'won' without giving up our Anglican identity. Certainly, this is a worst contamination? \<br /><br />Meanwhile, todays's ACNA, unlike '77, has a definite chance-- a place where we are not alone, finding Anglicans who can agree with the St. Louis affirmation as well as Articles, BCP, and Ordinal as they presently stand. Please read the REC/APA aritcles of intercommunion:<br />http://rechurch.org/recus/recus/intercommunion.html<br /><br />If we are not going to 'join' scattered Anglicans in north America in making a second ACNA covenant, why not at least pro-actively seek dialogue? I've read nothing on this blog or in the Trinitarian (or in the grapevine) that we are doing such. We should at least make the same effort as we've done with ROCOR. <br /><br />Regarding this final "Romano-purtian" word "contamination", it did not stop OCA Jonah from making an appearance at Bedford. Nor did it stop him from criticizing Anglican disorder. Making an appearance doesn't mean we compromise anything, but just the opposite. Nor does it prevent us from finding bishops within ACNA to work with us. etc. Is our own catholic identity so weak we'd be swayed by WO priestesses or liberals like Duncan? I really doubt that. <br /><br />What I believe is really feared is cooperation by ACC parishes may result in jurisdiction jumping into ACNA, like APA did with REC in Virginia. But who can 'jump' into ROCOR? ...<br /><br />What, in my opinion, is forgotten in all this is Section V of the St. Louis Affirmation, which was a public vow rendered to God. It therefore binds us. AB Haverland, moreover, said in his own book on Anglican Faith, ACC clergy indeed subscribe to the Affirmation. So no matter how you cut it, our Affirmation and covenant demands a particular ecumenically strategy which we are presently passive toward, and in many quarters indifferent.charleshttp://www.anglicanrose.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-51657432922410257752009-12-19T11:39:43.789-05:002009-12-19T11:39:43.789-05:00Charles wrote, "I wish and pray we would be m...Charles wrote, "I wish and pray we would be more active with faithful clergy in ACNA #2 rather than rabbit trails with the so-called Orthodox."<br /><br />The first thing we must do is define what is "faithful". While we share certain cultural aspirations (and by "cultural" I mean something deeper than mere aesthetics or a nostalgic Anglophilia) with many in ACNA #2, there are some vitally important issues over which we differ. Clearly, women's "ordination" and the 1979 "BCP" (and its "BAS" ilk) are two, although probably only two, of those.<br /><br />These two matters alone signal a fundamental difference in our approaches to what the Church is and, therefore, to what the Faith is. We see them as salvation issues; even those who do not practice these themselves but who are able to tolerate them in other members of their communion clearly do not see them in that same light.<br /><br />So, while as Fr. Hart has reminded us, Abp. Haverland proposed to Bp. Duncan that we could have discussions with the ACNA #2 if not actual altar fellowship, for the nonce, despite our cultural divisions, the Eastern Orthodox are far closer to us in their view of the Faith -- and especially in their views on Holy Tradition, authority in the Church, the sacramental meaning of the Apostolic Succession, etc. -- than is the Pittsburgh group.<br /><br />John A. Hollister+John A. Hollisterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01325615323834517909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-33338748080683020822009-12-18T23:31:58.829-05:002009-12-18T23:31:58.829-05:00Charles:
Have you read Archbishop Haverland's...Charles:<br /><br />Have you read Archbishop Haverland's <a href="http://anglicancontinuum.blogspot.com/2009/05/letter-to-bishop-robert-duncan-from-acc.html" rel="nofollow">reply</a> to Bishop Duncan? I knew Lou Tarsitano, and I believe he would have agreed wholeheartedly with the content of that letter. On one hand, there must be some communication and effort to influence the new ACNA; but, if we do not keep a formal distance, we could be contaminated by various local associations with women "priests" or "deacons." It is not possible at this time for formal relations, high level publicized talks, etc. But, do not confuse necessary standards that prevent "communio in sacris" with a complete lack of concern, or even of communication.Fr. Robert Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-13325026844912321722009-12-18T15:54:29.875-05:002009-12-18T15:54:29.875-05:00Sweet! This is awesome.
"My brother, David ...Sweet! This is awesome. <br /><br />"My brother, David Bentley Hart, wrote a chapter about St. Anselm in his first book, explaining to his fellow Orthodox Christians why Anselm's work was in accord with St. Gregory of Nyssa, and why the Orthodox should stop rejecting it out of hand, and take the time to evaluate it seriously: He explained why Anselm does not contradict Orthodox theology."charleshttp://www.anglicanrose.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-55644519001784714422009-12-18T15:52:32.913-05:002009-12-18T15:52:32.913-05:00I wish and pray we would be more active with faith...I wish and pray we would be more active with faithful clergy in ACNA #2 rather than rabbit trails with the so-called Orthodox. In the more recent thread on Anglican Polity, Fr. Tarsintano's essay strongly resonates with Section V, citing two historical facts, saying, "On the grounds of a national Church's right and duty to remain faithful, the organizers should welcome into communion all faithful Anglican jurisdictions within the United States. The tests of their faithfulness should be objective and spiritual: adherence to the doctrine, discipline, and worship that were received by the American Church from the Church of England, as represented by the 1662 Prayer Book of the Church of England and the 1789-1928 American Prayer Books..."<br /><br />Our reference point for ecumenicalism is thus our 'constitution' as Fr. Tarsitano calls it, the BCP, received from the 1662, 1928 obviously included. I think it has been said here before that if the Missal is selectively included in worship, it does no harm to 1928 BCP theology. But the key word is 'selective'. <br /><br />Fr. Tarsitano then pleads patience with fellow Anglicans, indicating a minimum reason for dialogue being the Quadralateral, and reminding us the difficulty of divers jurisdictions forming a provinicial church in the USA to begin with, "If we abstain from dIn the meantime, as the goal of the formation of a provincial communion is pursued, traditional Anglicans must recognize that reformation is not a seamless process in a nation as large as the United States. When the first provincial communion was formed in the United States, thirteen years had passed since the Declaration of Independence. During those years, the Churches in the various States struggled, not only for their own survival, but to find Scriptural ways of working with one another.<br /><br />The same must be true today. As our fellow Anglicans struggle to survive as Anglicans in the various regions and jurisdictions within our nation, we must not abandon them to their own devices. If they are truly Anglicans, or even if they only have managed to locate themselves within the boundaries of the Quadrilateral, then we are truly in communion with them, even if the details of a better order for our common life have yet to be arranged. To be voluntarily out of communion, when Christ has provided the necessary basis for communion, is sin."<br /><br />What is the necessary basis? The Quadrilateral, but also the BCP. Section V, along with Taristano's resonating essay, gives us an ecumenical vision, and that we dialogue patiently with other, faithful Anglican jurisdictions?. A jurisdiction is described as small as a single parish to a large diocese, "The second historical fact that is necessary to understand American Anglican polity is that national churches are communions of people, parishes, and dioceses, which come together to form one or more "provinces" of the Church". <br /><br />The rabbit hole I am speaking about, i.e., barking up Eastern or Roman trees, is what Fr. Hart said while commenting on Polity, "Anglicans need to see why they have been seriously misunderstood by people who simply do not understand old English, and who do not know the history of theology. Discussing them theologically with the RCC and the EOC in the hope of "political" unity would require many miraculous things to happen first. The context of such discussions is, quite possibly, beyond our imagination". <br /><br />So, why go head long toward 'modern' toward orthodoxy? We have the plain words of Section V-- seek out those orthodox Anglican clergy outside the continuum? Or, are you saying there are zippo? :) It's like we've become 'romano-puritans' and no Anglican outside the continuum is good enough for us? Meanwhile, we have, within our own jurisdiction, an ambiguous relationship with the 28 bcp and 39articles?charleshttp://www.anglicanrose.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.com