When I introduced myself at the inception of this blog, I said I would tell you more about my churchmanship in due course. As we are beginning to coalesce here, much to my great joy, I think now is an appropriate time to say more. At the outset, it didn’t really matter; now, I think, it does.
I like to call myself a genetic Anglican, because my parents were both Episcopalian. I was baptized as an infant at the Church of St Thomas, Eustis, Florida, in April 1951, and confirmed there some 10 years later. In my teens, I moved to the parish of St Edward’s, Mount Dora, which was closer to my home and to my social life. It was at St Edward’s that a first inkling of a vocation to the priesthood emerged, and was nurtured by my priest, Fr Walter Peterson. By the time I was a senior at the University of Florida, majoring in journalism, I concluded that the priesthood was where I was meant to be. I entered the “process,” and came out the other end like so many others of my age at the time – with my vocation “affirmed” but being told to “come back later after you get some experience in the ‘real world.'” I was also asked to do some group therapy, to learn how to say “no.” (I didn’t, but I do).
Anyway, as happened with so many like me, I went out into the real world and never came back – at least not for a very long time. That occurred when I was living in Madrid in the early 90s and began attending St George’s, whose chaplain, Henry Scriven, later became the suffragan bishop of the C of E Diocese of Europe, and is now right hand man to Bishop Duncan of Pittsburgh.
My relationship with +Henry led to my eventually being trained and licensed as a Reader in the C of E in London. During that period, I began to realize that my real vocation was where it always had been.
Quick jump to 15 months in Washington (and its wonderful St Paul’s, K Street) before moving to Cyprus more than five years ago, where I became a Reader at St Paul’s Cathedral, in the Episcopal Church of Jerusalem and the Middle East. It was there that I openly began to pursue again my vocation. After three years, and two selection panels, I was rejected.
Officially, I failed to communicate to the panel a “real understanding of the nature of priesthood.” My hunch is that the real reason is either that I was considered unfit, which may be true, or more likely that I had expressed discomfort with women’s ordination and outright opposition to the ordination of practicing homosexuals to Holy Orders.
I won’t go into further detail for now, because matters are sub judice, as it were, but I am in the process of joining the Anglican Church in America, with a view to eventually being ordained.
Forgive my long-windedness, but I think it fair for you to know who I am, and where I am coming from.
Friday, December 09, 2005
The Immaculate Conception of Our Lady (Feast Dec. 8)
While there may be individual continuing Anglican Catholics (AC) who would object to the content of this teaching for similar reasons to the Eastern Orthodox (EO) and earlier AC divines such as Pusey, especially because of its precarious-looking status in terms of the Vincentian Canon, it is in our authorised Missals, and so counts as part of the Tradition.
The reaction against it in both AC and EO circles has been partly based on its elevation to dogmatic status. To say it is divinely revealed in the same sense the Trinity and Resurrection doctrines are divinely revealed is simply false. A teaching that is revealed only in the most indirect and implicit fashion and is long either unknown or disputed, is obviously not a good candidate for dogma, even if the community of Faith becomes morally certain of its truth. This was precisely the objection of many Roman Catholic (RC) bishops when the Pope asked for their advice before defining the Immaculate Conception (IC) as dogma.
Another element in both AC and EO objections to RC Marian devotion in general is that it can tend very easily to lose its Christocentricity and teeter towards idolatry. For example, EO icons of Our Lady almost never picture her on her own, but in company with her Son. This is not so in Western art. As another example, and one that many Anglicans have found particularly galling, we had statements in popular RC devotional literature of the past that talked of Mary “commanding” her Son and of being the neck in Christ’s Body, so that all flowing from the Head, Christ himself, must flow through her as an intermediary. Wherever excesses and imbalances still exist, at least some of Pusey’s criticisms would still be valid. What would present-day RCs think if they read a passage like this below in a living RC theologian or heard it preached from the pulpit?
“There is some portion of the Precious Blood which once was Mary’s own blood, and which remains still in our Blessed Lord, incredibly exalted by its union with His Divine Person, yet still the same. This portion of Himself, it is piously believed, has not been allowed to undergo the usual changes of human substance. At this moment, in heaven, He retains something which was once His Mother’s, and which is, possibly, visible, as such, to the saints and angels. He vouchsafed at mass to show to S. Ignatius the very part of the Host which had once belonged to the substance of Mary.”
One of the most famous ACs of the Nineteenth Century, Pusey, believed that the IC dogma was going to lead to further dogmatisation, including of opinions such as those above. He seemed to think that the IC was only the start of an irrepressible urge to magnify Mary with virtually no limits except nominal denials of ascribing full-blown latreia to her. Fortunately, he was wrong. The RCC has, since then, tried to ensure popular exaggerations and devotional imbalances that distract from the Christ and the Gospel are kept in check much more than it used to. A welcome “development”.
However, Pusey was not infallible, and never claimed to be. The very fact that the English Calender maintained the Feast of the Conception as a black letter day even after the Reformation was considered significant by ACs. The BCP Preface to the Sanctus in the Canon for Christmas has the suggestive statement “Jesus … was made very man of the substance of the Virgin Mary his mother; and that without spot of sin”. These factors, and theological arguments of men like the great Anglican Neo-Thomist Fr Eric Mascall have all had their impact. The repeated description of Mary as Immaculate and All-Holy in the Ecumenical Councils was also determinitive: entirely without sin must mean what it says. So we have developed too.
The objection of many EO and some ACs in the past that the doctrine assumes the Augustinian doctrine of Original Guilt is not a problem once one realises it can be expressed without reference to this Western peculiarity. The key is to think positively rather than negatively and see the IC as the infusion of “sanctifying grace” simultaneous to her life beginning, or better still, as the immediate presence and power of God to save and sanctify doing so ab initio. Indeed, it was Mascall I think who noted that the IC simply involved God granting Mary the benefits of grace at her conception that we receive at baptism. The difference is that this meant sin and concupiscence were never able to find a place in her, whereas the implanting of a new nature continues to have "competition" from the pre-existing "old man" in us after baptism.
To sum up, the ecumenically Catholic belief in our Lady’s immaculacy implies, if taken seriously, a belief she was tainted by no sin or stain at all. This would include Original Sin. In addition, the suitability of Mary to be Christ’s mother must rest on what she is, not just on what she had or had not done. Her unique success in not committing any sin at all must be understood as resting on a unique condition, otherwise we risk falling into Pelagianism. Even if we do not accept the full Augustinian paradigm in soteriology, it is true to say that mankind’s fallen condition means humans come into existence affected by Original Sin, which is more than mortality[1] even if it is less than automatic liability to eternal condemnation.[2] Therefore, if all Catholics reject the idea of a sinful Mary with a corrupt human nature, they must logically all accept that she lived in that immaculate condition for a reason, and that that reason lies with God’s initiative, not hers.
There does not appear to be any justification for limiting or qualifying her immaculacy temporally if we do not do so in other ways. In other words, the mature Tradition does not leave us room to say “Mary was without any sin or sinfulness at all – except for the early part of her life.”
The following propositions I suggest are an ecumenical and orthodox statement of this doctrine.
The Blessed Virgin Mary was wholly without actual sin or sinfulness from the beginning to the end of her life on earth.
This was due to the grace of God in Christ and, later, her free co-operation.
This unique blessedness made her a fit life-spring and vessel for the Blessed One.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Some Eastern Orthodox claim that the Eastern Fathers do not talk of inherited sin but inherited mortality. While these Fathers do not accept inherited guilt, they certainly do accept inherited sinfulness or corruption. Another objection put forward is that the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception separates our Lady from the succession of Old Testament sanctity and breaks her link with her ancestor saints. The proper reply to this may be that her “preventative cleansing” and gracing were a reward for their faithfulness and an answer to their prayers for the complete redemption and restoration of the “virgin” Israel. It should not be forgotten that Eastern liturgical prayers on the Feast of the Conception of the Virgin call her immaculate. I am reminded of a conversation related to me by one of our priests, who discussed the issue with a Romanian Orthodox priest on December 8. Our priest concluded by saying that on that day he would celebrate the Feast of the Immaculate Conception of our Lady and that the next day his Romanian friend would celebrate the Feast of the Conception of our Immaculate Lady, so he didn’t see much difference!
[2] The Roman Catholic Church seems to have qualified its acceptance of Augustinianism by, for example, its statement in the recent Catechism of the Catholic Church (sections 404 & 405) that Original Sin is called so analogically and is not, strictly speaking, a personal fault.
Fr Matthew Kirby
The reaction against it in both AC and EO circles has been partly based on its elevation to dogmatic status. To say it is divinely revealed in the same sense the Trinity and Resurrection doctrines are divinely revealed is simply false. A teaching that is revealed only in the most indirect and implicit fashion and is long either unknown or disputed, is obviously not a good candidate for dogma, even if the community of Faith becomes morally certain of its truth. This was precisely the objection of many Roman Catholic (RC) bishops when the Pope asked for their advice before defining the Immaculate Conception (IC) as dogma.
Another element in both AC and EO objections to RC Marian devotion in general is that it can tend very easily to lose its Christocentricity and teeter towards idolatry. For example, EO icons of Our Lady almost never picture her on her own, but in company with her Son. This is not so in Western art. As another example, and one that many Anglicans have found particularly galling, we had statements in popular RC devotional literature of the past that talked of Mary “commanding” her Son and of being the neck in Christ’s Body, so that all flowing from the Head, Christ himself, must flow through her as an intermediary. Wherever excesses and imbalances still exist, at least some of Pusey’s criticisms would still be valid. What would present-day RCs think if they read a passage like this below in a living RC theologian or heard it preached from the pulpit?
“There is some portion of the Precious Blood which once was Mary’s own blood, and which remains still in our Blessed Lord, incredibly exalted by its union with His Divine Person, yet still the same. This portion of Himself, it is piously believed, has not been allowed to undergo the usual changes of human substance. At this moment, in heaven, He retains something which was once His Mother’s, and which is, possibly, visible, as such, to the saints and angels. He vouchsafed at mass to show to S. Ignatius the very part of the Host which had once belonged to the substance of Mary.”
One of the most famous ACs of the Nineteenth Century, Pusey, believed that the IC dogma was going to lead to further dogmatisation, including of opinions such as those above. He seemed to think that the IC was only the start of an irrepressible urge to magnify Mary with virtually no limits except nominal denials of ascribing full-blown latreia to her. Fortunately, he was wrong. The RCC has, since then, tried to ensure popular exaggerations and devotional imbalances that distract from the Christ and the Gospel are kept in check much more than it used to. A welcome “development”.
However, Pusey was not infallible, and never claimed to be. The very fact that the English Calender maintained the Feast of the Conception as a black letter day even after the Reformation was considered significant by ACs. The BCP Preface to the Sanctus in the Canon for Christmas has the suggestive statement “Jesus … was made very man of the substance of the Virgin Mary his mother; and that without spot of sin”. These factors, and theological arguments of men like the great Anglican Neo-Thomist Fr Eric Mascall have all had their impact. The repeated description of Mary as Immaculate and All-Holy in the Ecumenical Councils was also determinitive: entirely without sin must mean what it says. So we have developed too.
The objection of many EO and some ACs in the past that the doctrine assumes the Augustinian doctrine of Original Guilt is not a problem once one realises it can be expressed without reference to this Western peculiarity. The key is to think positively rather than negatively and see the IC as the infusion of “sanctifying grace” simultaneous to her life beginning, or better still, as the immediate presence and power of God to save and sanctify doing so ab initio. Indeed, it was Mascall I think who noted that the IC simply involved God granting Mary the benefits of grace at her conception that we receive at baptism. The difference is that this meant sin and concupiscence were never able to find a place in her, whereas the implanting of a new nature continues to have "competition" from the pre-existing "old man" in us after baptism.
To sum up, the ecumenically Catholic belief in our Lady’s immaculacy implies, if taken seriously, a belief she was tainted by no sin or stain at all. This would include Original Sin. In addition, the suitability of Mary to be Christ’s mother must rest on what she is, not just on what she had or had not done. Her unique success in not committing any sin at all must be understood as resting on a unique condition, otherwise we risk falling into Pelagianism. Even if we do not accept the full Augustinian paradigm in soteriology, it is true to say that mankind’s fallen condition means humans come into existence affected by Original Sin, which is more than mortality[1] even if it is less than automatic liability to eternal condemnation.[2] Therefore, if all Catholics reject the idea of a sinful Mary with a corrupt human nature, they must logically all accept that she lived in that immaculate condition for a reason, and that that reason lies with God’s initiative, not hers.
There does not appear to be any justification for limiting or qualifying her immaculacy temporally if we do not do so in other ways. In other words, the mature Tradition does not leave us room to say “Mary was without any sin or sinfulness at all – except for the early part of her life.”
The following propositions I suggest are an ecumenical and orthodox statement of this doctrine.
The Blessed Virgin Mary was wholly without actual sin or sinfulness from the beginning to the end of her life on earth.
This was due to the grace of God in Christ and, later, her free co-operation.
This unique blessedness made her a fit life-spring and vessel for the Blessed One.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Some Eastern Orthodox claim that the Eastern Fathers do not talk of inherited sin but inherited mortality. While these Fathers do not accept inherited guilt, they certainly do accept inherited sinfulness or corruption. Another objection put forward is that the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception separates our Lady from the succession of Old Testament sanctity and breaks her link with her ancestor saints. The proper reply to this may be that her “preventative cleansing” and gracing were a reward for their faithfulness and an answer to their prayers for the complete redemption and restoration of the “virgin” Israel. It should not be forgotten that Eastern liturgical prayers on the Feast of the Conception of the Virgin call her immaculate. I am reminded of a conversation related to me by one of our priests, who discussed the issue with a Romanian Orthodox priest on December 8. Our priest concluded by saying that on that day he would celebrate the Feast of the Immaculate Conception of our Lady and that the next day his Romanian friend would celebrate the Feast of the Conception of our Immaculate Lady, so he didn’t see much difference!
[2] The Roman Catholic Church seems to have qualified its acceptance of Augustinianism by, for example, its statement in the recent Catechism of the Catholic Church (sections 404 & 405) that Original Sin is called so analogically and is not, strictly speaking, a personal fault.
Fr Matthew Kirby
Merger ... and why not?
In a thread on Splinter Groups over at Anglo-Catholic Central, I came upon the following comment from ACA Lay Reader Ed Pacht, who is now already a major contributor to this blog (actually one of the few at the moment, in its early life). Does anyone have any answers?
The various Anglo-Catholic Continuing bodies, though they range from moderate to extreme in their catholicism, have precisely no substantial reason, theological or liturgical, to remain separate. The proximate cause of their separation and its continuance is nothing more or less than the perversity of fallen mankind. It's pride, self-will, and stubbornness, and a lack of agape. Reunion is a present necessity.
Why cannot sacramentally minded Anglicans who emphasize the truths of the Reformation and Anglo-Catholics who emphasize the continuity of Tradition unite around the Creeds and the Sacraments? It used to be so. It still can. And He prayed, "That they all may be ONE".
I'm part of the ACA, and thus of the TAC, and am glad of that -- but I bristle at being separated from brethren of other 'jurisdictions' -- this has to come to an end. A revisionist and non-(or barely)Christian Anglicanism has emerged. Why can't we who have determined to hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith that they have rejected, hold it in unity?
The various Anglo-Catholic Continuing bodies, though they range from moderate to extreme in their catholicism, have precisely no substantial reason, theological or liturgical, to remain separate. The proximate cause of their separation and its continuance is nothing more or less than the perversity of fallen mankind. It's pride, self-will, and stubbornness, and a lack of agape. Reunion is a present necessity.
Why cannot sacramentally minded Anglicans who emphasize the truths of the Reformation and Anglo-Catholics who emphasize the continuity of Tradition unite around the Creeds and the Sacraments? It used to be so. It still can. And He prayed, "That they all may be ONE".
I'm part of the ACA, and thus of the TAC, and am glad of that -- but I bristle at being separated from brethren of other 'jurisdictions' -- this has to come to an end. A revisionist and non-(or barely)Christian Anglicanism has emerged. Why can't we who have determined to hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith that they have rejected, hold it in unity?
Are you boring?
"Man nurtures the suspicion that God, at the end of the day, takes something away from his life, that God is a competitor who limits our freedom and that we will be fully human only when we will have set him aside," Benedict said.
"There emerges in us the suspicion that the person who doesn't sin at all is basically a boring person, that something is lacking in his life, the dramatic dimension of being autonomous, that the freedom to say 'no' belongs to real human beings."
Benedict XVI
"There emerges in us the suspicion that the person who doesn't sin at all is basically a boring person, that something is lacking in his life, the dramatic dimension of being autonomous, that the freedom to say 'no' belongs to real human beings."
Benedict XVI
Thursday, December 08, 2005
'Merry Christmas' school lunch menus recalled
'Merry Christmas' school lunch menus recalled
SEATTLE (AP) -- Holiday religious issues arose in two suburban school districts, one for lunch menus with the words ''Merry Christmas'' and the other for a ''giving tree.''
In Federal Way, between Seattle and Tacoma, December lunch menus for all 23 elementary schools were recalled and reprinted with the words ''Happy Holidays'' at a cost of $494 after a new nutrition services employee mistakenly prepared them with the greeting ''Merry Christmas,'' spokeswoman Diane Turner said.
Using ''Merry Christmas'' on the menus violated school system policies because ''it has a religious connotation for some people,'' Turner said.
There's a silver lining in every cloud. It's nice to know that Christmas has a religious connotation for "some people."
SEATTLE (AP) -- Holiday religious issues arose in two suburban school districts, one for lunch menus with the words ''Merry Christmas'' and the other for a ''giving tree.''
In Federal Way, between Seattle and Tacoma, December lunch menus for all 23 elementary schools were recalled and reprinted with the words ''Happy Holidays'' at a cost of $494 after a new nutrition services employee mistakenly prepared them with the greeting ''Merry Christmas,'' spokeswoman Diane Turner said.
Using ''Merry Christmas'' on the menus violated school system policies because ''it has a religious connotation for some people,'' Turner said.
There's a silver lining in every cloud. It's nice to know that Christmas has a religious connotation for "some people."
Narnia and Kids
Here is my contribution, courtesy of Zenit, to the slew of commentaries being made on the Narnia film. Interestingly, the assertion that children will not notice the film's Christian themes does not hold true in the case of my family. I asked my son Winslow, who couldn't have been more than eight or nine at the time, if he thought Aslan was like someone else. "Duh, Daddy. Jesus. Anybody can see that." I look forward to the film.
The Subtle Magic of C.S. Lewis' Narnia
Michael Coren's Perspective as New Movie Looms
"The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" may provide an opportunity for adults to talk about the faith, but don't expect children to notice the film's Christian themes.
So says Michael Coren, author, columnist and broadcaster who recently wrote "C.S. Lewis: The Man Who Created Narnia" (Ignatius), a biography of Lewis written for teens.
Coren told ZENIT how mostly adults will understand Lewis' subtle Christian allegory, and how "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" has the power to plant seeds of faith in kids just the same.
Q: What do Catholics need to know about C.S. Lewis?
Coren: They should know he wasn't a Catholic, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't have become one eventually. G.K. Chesterton became a Catholic in 1922 but had really been one for 20 years.
Lewis was born in Belfast, in sectarian Northern Ireland, so he was raised anti-Catholic like most Protestant children there. He was a man of his background but his views were very Catholic: He believed in purgatory, believed in the sacraments, went to confession.
Otherwise, he was the finest Christian apologist in modern times and could communicate the Gospel message in a thoughtful, accessible way.
Q: How blatantly does C.S. Lewis use Aslan as the figure of Christ in the Narnia series?
Coren: He does and he doesn't. Unlike many modern Christian writers, Lewis was subtle and implicit. When I read the book as a little boy I was overwhelmed by the greatness of it, but I didn't realize the Christian message until I was an adult.
It's explicit when you're older, but I don't think we should necessarily be pointing it out to children; we can let them find it themselves. They don't need a running commentary. Let them read it and be overwhelmed by it and not realize what they're really getting at the moment.
Q: What are some of the most notable parallels between Jesus and Aslan the Lion in "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe"?
Coren: There are many in this book and the other six in the series, but some obvious ones are: the breaking of the stone table and the old law being shattered; how it is winter but never Christmas, and it doesn't become Christmas until Aslan arrives; how Aslan dies for a sinner, a little boy who represents everyone, and takes away his sins; and how Aslan comes to life again and re-creates the world.
In the scene before Aslan's sacrifice for the little boy, Edmund, the White Witch says, "Because he has sinned, he is mine," and she intends to kill Edmund. And Aslan says, "But I can give myself in his place." She agrees to this and kills him, but then he is resurrected.
Q: What can we learn from Lewis about the integration of popular fiction and Christian values? Do you hope modern writers might follow suit?
Coren: J.K. Rowling has said that Lewis had a huge influence on her, yet many people have problems with Harry Potter. I've heard many writers say they've been influenced by Lewis and they try to copy him. It is often too similar; all these books are pale imitations.
He was of his age and wrote at a specific time in history. Some of his characters would not translate into modern times. If someone wrote a book today with those characters, kids wouldn't be able to relate to them. He was a man of 1963.
Q: What is the significance of another Christian film coming out of Hollywood, on the coattails of "The Passion of the Christ"?
Coren: I don't think "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" is a "Christian" film; we have to be careful with calling it that. I don't believe "The Passion" produced this movie -- I think "The Lord of the Rings" did.
What is more significant is why there have been no biblical movies after "The Passion." They could make a really bad movie and it would do well financially because there is such a hunger for Christian movies out there.
But Hollywood would rather do anything than make a movie with Christian values. It is a wonder that nothing has come after "The Passion."
Q: What are your hopes -- and fears -- for "The Lion"? Do you expect it to bear fruit as a witness to Christ and the Gospel message?
Coren: I haven't been able to see any special early screenings of "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" up here in Canada; the Christian world is not as organized or influential like in the States. I will be going to the midnight screening on Dec. 8 with everyone else.
I have no fears about the movie. There will always be some Christians who define their faith by what they are offended by, and nothing is ever pure enough for them. There will be people who say this or that is wrong, and some who think the movie should not have been made.
I think the movie will be a helpful way to talk about Christianity. People will read Lewis, talk about faith and the movie and other good things.
I read the book when I was 6 or 7. I wasn't raised in a Christian family and had no exposure to Christianity. Twenty years later I came into my faith and I am convinced the seeds were planted by that book. I believe my faith began then.
But we can't expect someone to see the movie, have an evangelical experience, and come out of the theater on their knees and say "Save me!" We shouldn't think it will change everything -- what did "The Passion" change? They are only movies. The Holy Spirit can use a movie but it doesn't need to.
The Subtle Magic of C.S. Lewis' Narnia
Michael Coren's Perspective as New Movie Looms
"The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" may provide an opportunity for adults to talk about the faith, but don't expect children to notice the film's Christian themes.
So says Michael Coren, author, columnist and broadcaster who recently wrote "C.S. Lewis: The Man Who Created Narnia" (Ignatius), a biography of Lewis written for teens.
Coren told ZENIT how mostly adults will understand Lewis' subtle Christian allegory, and how "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" has the power to plant seeds of faith in kids just the same.
Q: What do Catholics need to know about C.S. Lewis?
Coren: They should know he wasn't a Catholic, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't have become one eventually. G.K. Chesterton became a Catholic in 1922 but had really been one for 20 years.
Lewis was born in Belfast, in sectarian Northern Ireland, so he was raised anti-Catholic like most Protestant children there. He was a man of his background but his views were very Catholic: He believed in purgatory, believed in the sacraments, went to confession.
Otherwise, he was the finest Christian apologist in modern times and could communicate the Gospel message in a thoughtful, accessible way.
Q: How blatantly does C.S. Lewis use Aslan as the figure of Christ in the Narnia series?
Coren: He does and he doesn't. Unlike many modern Christian writers, Lewis was subtle and implicit. When I read the book as a little boy I was overwhelmed by the greatness of it, but I didn't realize the Christian message until I was an adult.
It's explicit when you're older, but I don't think we should necessarily be pointing it out to children; we can let them find it themselves. They don't need a running commentary. Let them read it and be overwhelmed by it and not realize what they're really getting at the moment.
Q: What are some of the most notable parallels between Jesus and Aslan the Lion in "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe"?
Coren: There are many in this book and the other six in the series, but some obvious ones are: the breaking of the stone table and the old law being shattered; how it is winter but never Christmas, and it doesn't become Christmas until Aslan arrives; how Aslan dies for a sinner, a little boy who represents everyone, and takes away his sins; and how Aslan comes to life again and re-creates the world.
In the scene before Aslan's sacrifice for the little boy, Edmund, the White Witch says, "Because he has sinned, he is mine," and she intends to kill Edmund. And Aslan says, "But I can give myself in his place." She agrees to this and kills him, but then he is resurrected.
Q: What can we learn from Lewis about the integration of popular fiction and Christian values? Do you hope modern writers might follow suit?
Coren: J.K. Rowling has said that Lewis had a huge influence on her, yet many people have problems with Harry Potter. I've heard many writers say they've been influenced by Lewis and they try to copy him. It is often too similar; all these books are pale imitations.
He was of his age and wrote at a specific time in history. Some of his characters would not translate into modern times. If someone wrote a book today with those characters, kids wouldn't be able to relate to them. He was a man of 1963.
Q: What is the significance of another Christian film coming out of Hollywood, on the coattails of "The Passion of the Christ"?
Coren: I don't think "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" is a "Christian" film; we have to be careful with calling it that. I don't believe "The Passion" produced this movie -- I think "The Lord of the Rings" did.
What is more significant is why there have been no biblical movies after "The Passion." They could make a really bad movie and it would do well financially because there is such a hunger for Christian movies out there.
But Hollywood would rather do anything than make a movie with Christian values. It is a wonder that nothing has come after "The Passion."
Q: What are your hopes -- and fears -- for "The Lion"? Do you expect it to bear fruit as a witness to Christ and the Gospel message?
Coren: I haven't been able to see any special early screenings of "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" up here in Canada; the Christian world is not as organized or influential like in the States. I will be going to the midnight screening on Dec. 8 with everyone else.
I have no fears about the movie. There will always be some Christians who define their faith by what they are offended by, and nothing is ever pure enough for them. There will be people who say this or that is wrong, and some who think the movie should not have been made.
I think the movie will be a helpful way to talk about Christianity. People will read Lewis, talk about faith and the movie and other good things.
I read the book when I was 6 or 7. I wasn't raised in a Christian family and had no exposure to Christianity. Twenty years later I came into my faith and I am convinced the seeds were planted by that book. I believe my faith began then.
But we can't expect someone to see the movie, have an evangelical experience, and come out of the theater on their knees and say "Save me!" We shouldn't think it will change everything -- what did "The Passion" change? They are only movies. The Holy Spirit can use a movie but it doesn't need to.
Wednesday, December 07, 2005
Polity and disunity
For the past few years I have followed, with genuine interest, the story about the TAC (Traditional Anglican Communion) working towards unity with Rome. At one point I was certain that I knew a great deal about it, but no longer. A few confusing and contradictory pieces of information have come my way; so I wait in hopes of learning the details and ascertaining the facts.
I cannot tell if the goal of establishing an Anglican "Uniate" Church has been replaced by a hope for "intercommunion" with Rome. Such a relationship is enjoyed by only a few churches, such as, for example, the Polish National Catholic Church; and then only under special circumstances.
As many readers will know, the institution the Catholic Church (when used exclusively to mean the Church of Rome and all of the churches that are under obedience to the Pope), contains several rites beside the Roman Rite, especially several Eastern Rite churches. When first I heard of the talks between the TAC and Rome the goal was that of establishing an Anglican Rite in the same way. As this was expressed to me about three years ago, it would exceed the significance of Anglican Use liturgies, because, to a much greater extent, the Anglican Ethos would survive in many of its crucial aspects as part of the larger Communion that includes all of the churches that are in communion with the Apostolic See of Rome.
Nonetheless, as a matter of stating the obvious, one very real and thorny issue appears to stand as an obstacle. And, I am sorry for that. I believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church (and for Prayer Book purists, who insist on the scribal error of dropping “Holy” from one Creed, remember it remains in the Apostle's Creed).
The Church, despite its apparent divisions, already is One. That is an article of faith, and one that keeps me from thinking that I must choose one or other of the two "One True Churches." So, I am hoping that the one obstacle I see will give way to the Unity of the Church by the working of the Holy Ghost.
When the Lord Jesus prayed "that they all may be one," this was not the pathetic cry of a suppliant hoping that we, mere mortals who wrestle with demonic powers, are somehow required to grant to Him. One Person of the Godhead expressed the Divine Will to Another Person of the Godhead. Other words had been spoken within the Trinity from the dawn of time: "Let there be light ... Let us make man in our image ..." The same Triune God spoke His will concerning the first husband and wife, creating marriage as part of human nature and making the man and woman one flesh within its bonds.
"That they all may be one ..." makes the One Church an article of faith for us. The word of God created it so, just as His word makes every married couple into one flesh. Some married couples live apart, whether by separation or by the legal fiction called "divorce." But, their oneness is the work of God, part of His very creation.
Likewise, the divisions of the Holy Catholic Church are only apparent. They are realities only insofar as they affect relations among Catholic Christians. We Anglicans are told that our belief about the Church should be called the "Branch Theory." But, if it is a theory it is still a fact, just like the Theory of Gravity. No doubt the Church has suffered apparent divisions, and needs to experience reconciliation. But, its oneness is established and confessed in Credo.
So, of course, I wish to see efforts towards visible unity succeed.
What is the problem? The simple fact is, the only people who can lead Catholic-minded Christians into workable unity are the bishops. Quite obviously, in light of the recognition by Rome of the validity of the Old Catholic orders, and to this day Rome’s recognition of the validity of the Polish National Catholic Church, married bishops are not a doctrinal problem. Rome recognizes married bishops as valid successors of the apostles, with full sacramental powers. And, yet, in its polity Rome has no room for married men to hold the office of bishop. I see no simple or obvious way around this problem. Perhaps someone reading this blog has an accurate answer. But, for now, it seems to me to be a genuine obstacle.
Fr Robert Hart
I cannot tell if the goal of establishing an Anglican "Uniate" Church has been replaced by a hope for "intercommunion" with Rome. Such a relationship is enjoyed by only a few churches, such as, for example, the Polish National Catholic Church; and then only under special circumstances.
As many readers will know, the institution the Catholic Church (when used exclusively to mean the Church of Rome and all of the churches that are under obedience to the Pope), contains several rites beside the Roman Rite, especially several Eastern Rite churches. When first I heard of the talks between the TAC and Rome the goal was that of establishing an Anglican Rite in the same way. As this was expressed to me about three years ago, it would exceed the significance of Anglican Use liturgies, because, to a much greater extent, the Anglican Ethos would survive in many of its crucial aspects as part of the larger Communion that includes all of the churches that are in communion with the Apostolic See of Rome.
Nonetheless, as a matter of stating the obvious, one very real and thorny issue appears to stand as an obstacle. And, I am sorry for that. I believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church (and for Prayer Book purists, who insist on the scribal error of dropping “Holy” from one Creed, remember it remains in the Apostle's Creed).
The Church, despite its apparent divisions, already is One. That is an article of faith, and one that keeps me from thinking that I must choose one or other of the two "One True Churches." So, I am hoping that the one obstacle I see will give way to the Unity of the Church by the working of the Holy Ghost.
When the Lord Jesus prayed "that they all may be one," this was not the pathetic cry of a suppliant hoping that we, mere mortals who wrestle with demonic powers, are somehow required to grant to Him. One Person of the Godhead expressed the Divine Will to Another Person of the Godhead. Other words had been spoken within the Trinity from the dawn of time: "Let there be light ... Let us make man in our image ..." The same Triune God spoke His will concerning the first husband and wife, creating marriage as part of human nature and making the man and woman one flesh within its bonds.
"That they all may be one ..." makes the One Church an article of faith for us. The word of God created it so, just as His word makes every married couple into one flesh. Some married couples live apart, whether by separation or by the legal fiction called "divorce." But, their oneness is the work of God, part of His very creation.
Likewise, the divisions of the Holy Catholic Church are only apparent. They are realities only insofar as they affect relations among Catholic Christians. We Anglicans are told that our belief about the Church should be called the "Branch Theory." But, if it is a theory it is still a fact, just like the Theory of Gravity. No doubt the Church has suffered apparent divisions, and needs to experience reconciliation. But, its oneness is established and confessed in Credo.
So, of course, I wish to see efforts towards visible unity succeed.
What is the problem? The simple fact is, the only people who can lead Catholic-minded Christians into workable unity are the bishops. Quite obviously, in light of the recognition by Rome of the validity of the Old Catholic orders, and to this day Rome’s recognition of the validity of the Polish National Catholic Church, married bishops are not a doctrinal problem. Rome recognizes married bishops as valid successors of the apostles, with full sacramental powers. And, yet, in its polity Rome has no room for married men to hold the office of bishop. I see no simple or obvious way around this problem. Perhaps someone reading this blog has an accurate answer. But, for now, it seems to me to be a genuine obstacle.
Fr Robert Hart
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
Free Piglet
I recently read the story of a secretary at a town hall (council) office in England who had a coffee mug or a stuffed animal of Winnie the Pooh and Piglet on her desk. A Muslim man who had come into the office on business complained that he was offended by the presence of the pig, and demanded it be removed. It was. This led to the formation of the Free Piglet campaign. From time to time, I will share with you examples of other incidents in which Christians are being persecuted, not only in countries where their religion is theoretically a majority, but also where it is not. The following comes from Drudge Report.
UK: GIRL SENT HOME FROM SCHOOL FOR WEARING A CRUCIFIX
Mon Dec 05 2005 19:45:41 ET
A school today defended its decision to exclude a pupil after she refused to take off her crucifix necklace.
Sam Morris, 16, was told to remove her cross and chain on Thursday by deputy head teacher Howard Jones at Sinfin Community School in Derby.
When the year-11 student refused she was told not to return until today and without the item of jewellery.
The 1,070-student comprehensive has a strict policy which bans most jewellery being worn.
Items can be worn out of view or if they are part of religious beliefs, such as the Kara, a bracelet worn by Sikh males.
But the policy has been described as "unfair" by Sam's mother, Debra Saunders.
Sinfin Community School deputy head teacher Howard Jones said her daughter's one-day exclusion had been a "last resort" after a 30-minute conversation failed to persuade her to take it off.
He said: "There was a long period of persuasion with her and she was given time. It was only at the end of that that I reluctantly had to exclude her for a day.
"I met with her mother today and readmitted her daughter."
Mr Jones said the strict jewellery policy, which bans large earrings or items worn on the outside of clothing - was to avoid accidents and to remove temptation from thieves.
However, Sikh male pupils are allowed to wear the Kara, one of five physical symbols worn by followers of the faith.
Mr Jones said: "As a Christian I don't have to wear a crucifix but Sikhs don't have that option and we have to be understanding. We live in a multi-faith society."
Mrs Saunders, of Thackeray Street, Sinfin, told the Derby Evening Telegraph: "Sam has worn this necklace for more than three years and it is of great sentimental value to her.
"No-one has told her to take it off before and she doesn't want to.
"She thinks it is very unfair when other people are allowed to wear religious symbols and it just ends up creating a divide between the pupils when everyone is told they should be living in unity."
Developing...
UK: GIRL SENT HOME FROM SCHOOL FOR WEARING A CRUCIFIX
Mon Dec 05 2005 19:45:41 ET
A school today defended its decision to exclude a pupil after she refused to take off her crucifix necklace.
Sam Morris, 16, was told to remove her cross and chain on Thursday by deputy head teacher Howard Jones at Sinfin Community School in Derby.
When the year-11 student refused she was told not to return until today and without the item of jewellery.
The 1,070-student comprehensive has a strict policy which bans most jewellery being worn.
Items can be worn out of view or if they are part of religious beliefs, such as the Kara, a bracelet worn by Sikh males.
But the policy has been described as "unfair" by Sam's mother, Debra Saunders.
Sinfin Community School deputy head teacher Howard Jones said her daughter's one-day exclusion had been a "last resort" after a 30-minute conversation failed to persuade her to take it off.
He said: "There was a long period of persuasion with her and she was given time. It was only at the end of that that I reluctantly had to exclude her for a day.
"I met with her mother today and readmitted her daughter."
Mr Jones said the strict jewellery policy, which bans large earrings or items worn on the outside of clothing - was to avoid accidents and to remove temptation from thieves.
However, Sikh male pupils are allowed to wear the Kara, one of five physical symbols worn by followers of the faith.
Mr Jones said: "As a Christian I don't have to wear a crucifix but Sikhs don't have that option and we have to be understanding. We live in a multi-faith society."
Mrs Saunders, of Thackeray Street, Sinfin, told the Derby Evening Telegraph: "Sam has worn this necklace for more than three years and it is of great sentimental value to her.
"No-one has told her to take it off before and she doesn't want to.
"She thinks it is very unfair when other people are allowed to wear religious symbols and it just ends up creating a divide between the pupils when everyone is told they should be living in unity."
Developing...
Monday, December 05, 2005
Welcome to Fr Matthew Kirby
Fr Matthew Kirby joins The Continuum today as my second co-host. He is also a prolific blogger, and a serious thinker and apologist for Continuing Anglicanism.
Here is what he has to say about himself on his homepage:
"Hello! I am a priest in the Diocese of Australia in the Anglican Catholic Church, an Anglican body that holds, teaches and practices the Faith of the Church, "the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Timothy 3:15), as it was before the sad divisions of the last millennium. Like the Eastern Orthodox, we accept the entirety of Holy Tradition derived from the Apostles. This Tradition, that is, "teaching handed on from generation to generation" (see 2 Thessalonians 2:15 & 2 Timothy 2:2), includes the Scriptures, the Creeds and the Seven Ecumenical Councils. I am also a Franciscan Tertiary.
The other hat I wear is that of a physics/maths/religious studies teacher in a local Roman Catholic Senior High School, St Mary's Campus of All Saint's College, Maitland.
Here is what he has to say about himself on his homepage:
"Hello! I am a priest in the Diocese of Australia in the Anglican Catholic Church, an Anglican body that holds, teaches and practices the Faith of the Church, "the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Timothy 3:15), as it was before the sad divisions of the last millennium. Like the Eastern Orthodox, we accept the entirety of Holy Tradition derived from the Apostles. This Tradition, that is, "teaching handed on from generation to generation" (see 2 Thessalonians 2:15 & 2 Timothy 2:2), includes the Scriptures, the Creeds and the Seven Ecumenical Councils. I am also a Franciscan Tertiary.
The other hat I wear is that of a physics/maths/religious studies teacher in a local Roman Catholic Senior High School, St Mary's Campus of All Saint's College, Maitland.
A Book Review on Sacred Language
Michael Dirda
A season to remember the transforming power of sacred language.
THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER
The Elizabethan Prayer Book
Edited by John E. Booty
Virginia/Folger. 427 pp. $29.95
W.H. Auden used to warn against those who read the Bible for its prose. Ignore this advice. The hoopla of the next few weeks should be interrupted from time to time with quiet moments when we reflect on our lives and the years past and to come, and one of the best ways to do this is by meditating on grave and noble sentences. So, whether believer or not, turn to the Gospel of Luke:
"And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. . . . And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem (because he was of the house and lineage of David), to be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn."
As a boy, I would hear these words spoken aloud toward the end of December, year after year, and they never failed to deliver a shivery thrill of pleasure. I used to wonder why. The sentences were utterly plain, both in diction and syntax. Neither did they possess any narrative excitement, since I knew the story already, indeed knew it far better than any other in all the world. But the language -- like that of so many other passages from the Bible -- enchanted me with what I now think of as its deeply felt seriousness.
Read it all here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/01/AR2005120100946_pf.html
A season to remember the transforming power of sacred language.
THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER
The Elizabethan Prayer Book
Edited by John E. Booty
Virginia/Folger. 427 pp. $29.95
W.H. Auden used to warn against those who read the Bible for its prose. Ignore this advice. The hoopla of the next few weeks should be interrupted from time to time with quiet moments when we reflect on our lives and the years past and to come, and one of the best ways to do this is by meditating on grave and noble sentences. So, whether believer or not, turn to the Gospel of Luke:
"And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. . . . And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem (because he was of the house and lineage of David), to be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn."
As a boy, I would hear these words spoken aloud toward the end of December, year after year, and they never failed to deliver a shivery thrill of pleasure. I used to wonder why. The sentences were utterly plain, both in diction and syntax. Neither did they possess any narrative excitement, since I knew the story already, indeed knew it far better than any other in all the world. But the language -- like that of so many other passages from the Bible -- enchanted me with what I now think of as its deeply felt seriousness.
Read it all here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/01/AR2005120100946_pf.html
Sunday, December 04, 2005
Welcome to Fr Robert Hart
I would like to introduce Fr Robert Hart, who joins me as a co-host of and contributor to The Continuum. Many of you will know him from his thoughtful and stimulating commentary on other blogs.
Fr Robert, a Contributing Editor of Touchstone, a Journal of Mere Christianity, was ordained as a priest in the old Anglican Rite Synod of the Americas (at the time a part of the Phillippine Independent Catholic Church).
For several years, he was vicar of Saint Andrew's Church in Easton, Maryland. This year, he was received as a priest into the Anglican Province of Christ the King under Bishop Frederick Morrison in the Diocese of the Southwestern States. He lives in Fountain Hills, Arizona, and is vicar of the Church of the Atonement.( http://www.atonementchurchfountainhills.org/ )
Speaking about himself, he says: "I was a cradle Episcopalian, baptized in 1958 and confirmed in 1971. But, during the mid-seventies, I was a Charismatic Evangelical. This was during my youth. It was in 1980 that I began to turn back to my Catholic beliefs, due mainly to the influence of Dr. Aristeides Papadakis. At the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, he taught Church History to all three of the Hart Brothers one at at time, (Fr. Addison Hart, Dr. David Bentley Hart and myself). Eventually, I left the Episcopal Church."
Fr Robert is married, with four children.
Fr Robert, a Contributing Editor of Touchstone, a Journal of Mere Christianity, was ordained as a priest in the old Anglican Rite Synod of the Americas (at the time a part of the Phillippine Independent Catholic Church).
For several years, he was vicar of Saint Andrew's Church in Easton, Maryland. This year, he was received as a priest into the Anglican Province of Christ the King under Bishop Frederick Morrison in the Diocese of the Southwestern States. He lives in Fountain Hills, Arizona, and is vicar of the Church of the Atonement.( http://www.atonementchurchfountainhills.org/ )
Speaking about himself, he says: "I was a cradle Episcopalian, baptized in 1958 and confirmed in 1971. But, during the mid-seventies, I was a Charismatic Evangelical. This was during my youth. It was in 1980 that I began to turn back to my Catholic beliefs, due mainly to the influence of Dr. Aristeides Papadakis. At the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, he taught Church History to all three of the Hart Brothers one at at time, (Fr. Addison Hart, Dr. David Bentley Hart and myself). Eventually, I left the Episcopal Church."
Fr Robert is married, with four children.
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Growth
I hope to have news soon about plans to make this blog more open to the broader traditional Anglican community -- as a focal point for teaching, spiritual growth and work toward unity among ourselves and with the broader orthodox Catholic world. In part, I am hopeful that this will entail the coming on board of two priests, men whose theology has impressed me deeply.
In that vein, I encourage all readers to consider The Continuum to be a place to which they can come with their own suggestions for discussion.
I welcome each of you on behalf of all of us. Don't hesitate to contact me offline.
In that vein, I encourage all readers to consider The Continuum to be a place to which they can come with their own suggestions for discussion.
I welcome each of you on behalf of all of us. Don't hesitate to contact me offline.
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
Nigerian-REC-APA Covenant
Another very interesting step in the process of Anglican realignment.
COVENANT UNION OF ANGLICAN CHURCHES IN CONCORDAT
AMONG THE CHURCH OF NIGERIA (ANGLICAN COMMUNION) THE REFORMED EPISCOPAL CHURCH, AND
THE ANGLICAN PROVINCE OF AMERICA
Whereas the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion), the Reformed Episcopal Church and the Anglican Province of America share a common heritage of faith and order within the Anglican tradition; be it understood that:
Article 1: The Churches, recognizing the fact that they are working together in the common cause of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, pledge to each other, their mutual cooperation, support, discipline and accountability.
Article 2: Wherever possible, individual congregations within proximate geographic locations will work closely and cooperatively to demonstrate their commitment to one another and their desire to witness to a consistent Biblical, Evangelical and Catholic expression of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
Article 3: As evidence of our union in Christ and the Common Standards of the faith existing among the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion), the Reformed Episcopal Church and the Anglican Province of America, a delegation of ministers and laity may be sent to attend each other’s Provincial and General Synods or Councils. As a further demonstration of our union, bishops of the Churches may attend each other’s episcopal meetings with the expectation that they will be invited to speak but not cast votes.
Article 4: The Ministers of the Churches may, subject to the respective regulations of the Churches, be eligible to exercise pastoral ministry in each Church. Archbishops and Bishops of the Churches in the concordat may also be invited to conduct episcopal duties with accountability, discipline and the episcopal blessing of the local appropriate provincial authorities.
Article 5: Communicants of the Churches may be received into the other Churches on presentation of letters of transfer, or their equivalent.
Article 6: It is also our declared intention to initiate a process that will permit us, in due course to enter into an agreement of full communion with a clear and common understanding of all of its implications.
(Thanks to TitusOneNine)
COVENANT UNION OF ANGLICAN CHURCHES IN CONCORDAT
AMONG THE CHURCH OF NIGERIA (ANGLICAN COMMUNION) THE REFORMED EPISCOPAL CHURCH, AND
THE ANGLICAN PROVINCE OF AMERICA
Whereas the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion), the Reformed Episcopal Church and the Anglican Province of America share a common heritage of faith and order within the Anglican tradition; be it understood that:
Article 1: The Churches, recognizing the fact that they are working together in the common cause of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, pledge to each other, their mutual cooperation, support, discipline and accountability.
Article 2: Wherever possible, individual congregations within proximate geographic locations will work closely and cooperatively to demonstrate their commitment to one another and their desire to witness to a consistent Biblical, Evangelical and Catholic expression of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
Article 3: As evidence of our union in Christ and the Common Standards of the faith existing among the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion), the Reformed Episcopal Church and the Anglican Province of America, a delegation of ministers and laity may be sent to attend each other’s Provincial and General Synods or Councils. As a further demonstration of our union, bishops of the Churches may attend each other’s episcopal meetings with the expectation that they will be invited to speak but not cast votes.
Article 4: The Ministers of the Churches may, subject to the respective regulations of the Churches, be eligible to exercise pastoral ministry in each Church. Archbishops and Bishops of the Churches in the concordat may also be invited to conduct episcopal duties with accountability, discipline and the episcopal blessing of the local appropriate provincial authorities.
Article 5: Communicants of the Churches may be received into the other Churches on presentation of letters of transfer, or their equivalent.
Article 6: It is also our declared intention to initiate a process that will permit us, in due course to enter into an agreement of full communion with a clear and common understanding of all of its implications.
(Thanks to TitusOneNine)
Saturday, November 12, 2005
Introduction
For more than a year I have actively participated in discussions on other blogs, and often felt frustrated by never being able to bring up myself a topic that came to mind.
That is now behind me, thanks to Google and blogger.com.
Like most blogs, The Continuum has a purpose, and I heartily welcome all who choose to participate within that framework. That said, I envision there will be times when discussion goes a bit off-topic, or even way off-topic. No problem as far as I am concerned, as long as people are civil.
A bit about myself.
I call myself a genetic Anglican, as I was born to parents who were both Episcopalian. I was born into, baptised and confirmed into what was then called the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States of America, and now has a name I dare not utter.
Now, at nearly 55, I have been here, there and just about everywhere geographically. I have been on the lovely Mediterranean island of Cyprus for the past five years, where I work as a wire journalist and my Spanish wife, Susana, teaches ... Spanish. Daughter Andrea, 16, is a budding actress and son, Winslow, has just officially become a teenager.
I'll have a good deal more to say about my churchmanship in due time. For now, suffice it to say that I have resolved to depart from the Anglican Communion of my birth as a result of the nonsense of the past couple of years, and the even more serious problems that have led to that.
Suffice it to say that however narrow it looks, the Bosphorus was too wide for me to swim, while there was a watergate on the Tiber than repelled me.
So come aboard my little barque, and let us see where the current will take us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)