tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post7833236447886575099..comments2024-03-24T15:19:06.377-04:00Comments on The Continuum: ZweifrontenkriegFr. Robert Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-58134762690030935072010-03-02T20:33:26.769-05:002010-03-02T20:33:26.769-05:00Given what Elizabeth I did for others who attempte...Given what Elizabeth I did for others who attempted to teach the truth and fullness of the Gospel as received by the apostles and faithfully and fully delivered to the Church, it was certainly not in jest. Instead it was an acknowledgment of something very well done; something which I believe it is always the task of the Church, clergy and laity alike, to do.<br /><br />Shaughn is precisely right that we can not base ourselves up on the model of either Elizabeth's or her father's church, but we should be doing our best to do what Elizabeth much more than her father attempted to do which was to protect and preserve the Lord's church and the fullness of the Gospel it has the responsibility of maintaining in word and sacrament in troubled times so that it will be there for the generations to come. This is never an easy task and in some generations it is much more difficult than we might ever wish. We may think things difficult now but let us realize that in the very near future they may very well be worse.Canon Tallishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05182884929479435751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-19093202204881383982010-03-02T09:29:08.655-05:002010-03-02T09:29:08.655-05:00Canon Tallis writes,
"Elizabeth I might have...Canon Tallis writes,<br /><br /><i>"Elizabeth I might have given you a bishopric for that.</i>"<br /><br />I know this was meant in praise and in a bit of a jest, but it illustrates a fine point about how the Continuing Churches cannot <i>simply</i> be based on an Elizabethan (or even Henrician) model. We elect our bishops (sometimes kicking and screaming), as was the custom of the early, undivided church. And thank God for it.RSC+https://www.blogger.com/profile/00639369749327986414noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-6413794450125160602010-02-28T01:50:17.950-05:002010-02-28T01:50:17.950-05:00Different men have different strengths and weaknes...Different men have different strengths and weaknesses. Abp. Morse was certainly a strong leader before his retirement (I think he will be 87 this year), and quite effective in personal evangelism on the Berkeley campus (and my own experiences with him were always positive; in short I like him and will always remember him with affection). I never met Bp. Mote, but my understanding from those who knew him was that he was a true saint, a loving pastor and leader by example.<br /><br />Nonetheless, I believe that neither man would qualify as a great scholar on Elizabethan theologians, and that, with all their strengths, neither had ever been willing to give the Protestant elements in Anglicanism a fair and balanced appraisal.Fr. Robert Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-10303623508004928442010-02-27T23:17:54.311-05:002010-02-27T23:17:54.311-05:00Canon Tallis,
I didn't have any idea whom you...Canon Tallis,<br /><br />I didn't have any idea whom you were writing about. I haven't seen any posts on this blog that matched your description. I had no reason to think you were writing about the two bishops you mentioned in your previous post.<br /><br />I don't know Archbishop Morse, God bless and keep him, but the words "rant" and "Bishop Mote" are as incongruous to me as "McDonald's Breakfast Burrito."Fr. Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18097549748468739701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-69526799280251144742010-02-27T13:52:04.918-05:002010-02-27T13:52:04.918-05:00Father John,
I am assuming that you believe that ...Father John,<br /><br />I am assuming that you believe that you are one of whom I have written. And I would sort of wonder why you might think so?<br /><br />But I also don't think that you have ever had the opportunity to hear either Bishop Morse or Bishop Mote in full rant over the issue. I have, but I also pursued the conversation until it became clear that neither had any idea of what the Settlement was about either theologically or liturgically.Canon Tallishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05182884929479435751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-39655551026525788592010-02-27T11:06:16.849-05:002010-02-27T11:06:16.849-05:00No one here, to my knowledge, has "derided&qu...No one here, to my knowledge, has "derided" or "despised" the Elizabethan settlement. Rather it has been evaluated and analyzed from historical, liturgical, and theological points of views. There are several takes on this subject, and I can respect them all while vigorously defending my own analysis.<br /><br />This type of rhetoric, of attributing negative emotions and extreme attitudes to those who do not agree with us, is what we have come to expect from the proponents of the Apostolic Constitution. Honestly, it really doesn't add much to the discussion.Fr. Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18097549748468739701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-64756520711607093732010-02-26T13:22:57.953-05:002010-02-26T13:22:57.953-05:00Again, a most excellent post and one which reminds...Again, a most excellent post and one which reminds me that my first visit to an Anglican parish was occasioned by that reading from St. Peter's epistle: "Brethren, be sober, be vigilant. . ." As Catholics and Anglicans we should know that this two faced war is going to continue until the judgment and that we must be prepared to deal with it.<br /><br />And, again, the more modern Anglo-Catholics seem unaware of the writing of the Anglican greats because, unfortunately, they were and are. I was always delighted with Dr. Mascall because he quoted so extensively from those same Anglican greats because it sent me off to another great mind full of unknown but knowable treasures. Consequently, it was an even greater pleasure to hear him utterly demolish the so-called higher criticism of Holy Scripture by exposing the weakness if not absolute absence of logic in its foundations. <br /><br />One of the major things which Newman said about Anglicanism was was and remains true is that its basis is Antiquity. And that foundation was built into Elizabeth's prayer book, the Articles and the canons of 1571. And it was one which she made entirely personal in her own writings, personal devotions and the conduct of her own chapel where her bishops were required to wear what they privately complained of as "the golden vestments of the papacy." But in that they were wrong and not she, because the vestments whose use she and the prayer book of 1559 required were those of the entire history of the Church.<br /><br />Our greatest shame is that so many among us are so ashamed of Anglicanism, so willing to run to Rome to give them some cover of "catholicity" and that largely because they do not know and will not set themselves to read the greats of our faith. So instead of standing with Antiquity, Universality and Consent, they rifle through the debris boxes of Rome's most decadent period and collect her discards. They need to read The Tale of the Tub and have a laugh or two.<br /><br />For myself, the most amusing piece of irony is that in the main it is in the parishes and and missions of the Continuum that the Elizabethan Settlement is most lived and most maintained if verbally derided and despised.<br /><br />"duckeure" Someone is sure to throw something.<br />"hopednes" But not without change.Canon Tallishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05182884929479435751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-52191940111379523512010-02-26T11:14:48.681-05:002010-02-26T11:14:48.681-05:00"On one front, Stand Firm, with a false versi..."On one front, Stand Firm, with a false version of Protestantism that is less extreme than the atheist version of Spong and Jefferts-Schori,...seeks to present a kind of Christianity that cannot really stand up against the dangers of women's ordination and every other innovation of revisionism, not even against the "same sex" heresy that they currently (as in, for the time being) condemn."<br /><br />ON the same lines most AMiA churches use the 1979 BCP, maybe a 1928 service for the blue-hairs but the main focus is usually the "Praise and Worship" show with an altar dance crewJosephhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17821199057003585343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-81946888689594483682010-02-25T16:46:26.674-05:002010-02-25T16:46:26.674-05:00By the way, though I do not mind answering a quest...By the way, though I do not mind answering a question that is on a specific topic, I want the comments in the thread to remain mostly focused on the subject of the essay, so that we are discussing that.Fr. Robert Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-83385575927451307372010-02-25T16:44:12.697-05:002010-02-25T16:44:12.697-05:00Without good cause, a divorced person cannot simpl...Without good cause, a divorced person cannot simply have a Decree of Nullity (annulment) regarding a previous marriage. But, with a Decree of Nullity such a person is free to marry, and can be married in church. A valid marriage is until the death of one of the spouses. <br /><br />About Birth Control, if someone can give a good moral reason why it is necessary-<i>morally necessary</i>-I would be willing to consider the question (e.g., a married woman who likely cannot survive childbirth and wants to hold a family together, one of those hard case questions). But, people are simply deciding whether or not they <i>want</i> children, like whether or not they want a new car. That is clearly immoral, and a rejection of God's stated will that married couples be fruitful and multiply. It indicates also something wrong deep down inside.<br /><br />Marriage, when it is between able bodied people young enough to become parents, is supposed to result in children, and if that is simply refused we should question the validity of the marriage itself.Fr. Robert Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-88823489233363102862010-02-25T11:52:09.998-05:002010-02-25T11:52:09.998-05:00Father Hart,
Would can you please tell me if the A...Father Hart,<br />Would can you please tell me if the ACC is Catholic in its teaching about divorce and birth control? I am unable to find the answer on the ACC website or in the Affirmation of St. Louis.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-7508850076575389062010-02-25T05:13:00.321-05:002010-02-25T05:13:00.321-05:00As further apologetic for the Elizabethan Settleme...As further apologetic for the Elizabethan Settlement, I would note that, standing alone, the fact that is has failed to hold ascendency in the Canterbury Communion is proof that it has in fact failed, not that it failed due to any internal defect, and not that it cannot be revived. <br /><br />Indeed, external forces are much to be blamed. <br /><br />Following the Restoration and the apparent triumph of the Settlement over Puritanism in the hearts and mind of the English people, the Settlement might well have lived happily ever after were it not for James II's unfortunate defection to Rome and the subsequently Glorious Revolution. This close call with another religiously-tinged shooting war not unreasonably encouraged the decision-making class of Englishmen to prefer a Church policy that scarifice the complete integrity of the Elizabethan Settlement by tolerating Puritanism, requiring only minimal or nominal conformity. Though done for noble purposes, this policy of religious comprehension established a principle of inclusivism with the Canterbury Communion which has almost inexorably run its logical course to straight through to Williams and Schori.<br /><br />Thus, it was not the Church's principled adherence to the Elizabethan Settlement, as the Old High Churchman would have preferred, but rather the compromise thereof, first to the Evangelical successors of the Puritans with their love of the Continental Reformation, and subsequently to the Victorian Anglo-Catholics with their love of the Counter-Reformation, that ultimately led to the spoliation of the English Reformation by yet a third way--"Liberal Christianity."<br /><br />And while virtually nobody in the "Denver-Consecration Continuum" is championing the Continental Reformation, it does seem that those who would revive the English Reformation are up against those with decidedly Counter-Reformation sympathies. Whether these twain position can co-exist in a single Communion ultimately remains to be seen, English religious history seems to indicate that the comprehension of fundamentally inconsistent theological, liturgical, and spiritual points of view will not long hold.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-77331694033763589262010-02-25T02:37:00.792-05:002010-02-25T02:37:00.792-05:00And I like your reply to Michael even more, althou...And I like your reply to Michael even more, although there is much in what he wrote that I find quite right.Canon Tallishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05182884929479435751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-56457437826714545502010-02-25T02:33:21.833-05:002010-02-25T02:33:21.833-05:00Elizabeth I might have given you a bishopric for t...Elizabeth I might have given you a bishopric for that. Or, at least, made you dean of Westminster. That was true Classical Anglicanism and burning with glory. AmenCanon Tallishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05182884929479435751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-13516343817851455572010-02-25T01:14:33.490-05:002010-02-25T01:14:33.490-05:00Fr. John,
Again, I agree with you. Perhaps I rai...Fr. John, <br /><br />Again, I agree with you. Perhaps I rail against nothing. I have yet to decide the virtue of a broadly catholic church. "Like-mindedness" is assumed whenever we give our 'amen' (or partake in communion). I would not want to forswear, especially when hands are laid for mission (both lay and clerical). It is very important, and many of the Articles indeed touch upon questions once believed essential to the faith, life, and salvation found in the church.charleshttp://www.anglicanrose.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-30964120156593272332010-02-25T01:09:35.829-05:002010-02-25T01:09:35.829-05:00Michael wrote:
There is little good to come out o...Michael wrote:<br /><br /><i>There is little good to come out of proving one's theological legitimacy, and defending one's own tradition, if it does not contribute to our common task.</i><br /><br />But, that is one part of the whole idea. We defend it so that it may live, and in a way similar to St. Paul's chapter on the gifts of the Spirit in the Body of Christ (I Cor. 12). By living and sharing its gift, it offers health to the whole Body of the Church Catholic.<br /><br /><i>Anglicanism cannot do this simply based on an intellectual argument.</i><br /><br />No, it can't. The Church is alive, and living things are not imprisoned by intellectual formulas. Still, we need these things because we need structure, as bodies need a skeleton. This why I refer so often to Richard Hooker; more than his specific thoughts was his ability to teach us to think as we ought, to provide that structure.<br /><br />When I look at the life and growth of the ACC (which I see most closely and know better than the others) I do not see simply intellectual formulation. I see life, and life that renews itself and procreates itself. I see the work of the Holy Spirit.Fr. Robert Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-42536773989626215032010-02-24T22:55:58.949-05:002010-02-24T22:55:58.949-05:00I think that even more than an intellectual argume...I think that even more than an intellectual argument, what this vision of Traditional Anglicanism needs in order to succeed is for the ACC-OP, APCK and UECNA to formally unite into a single church structure, to better facilitate co-operation - and to focus efforts primarily on outreach to non-Christians.<br /><br />There are, unfortunately, very serious arguments taking place right now about the future of Anglicanism, and various visions have been articulated. But I think that the ultimate test of these visions is how much they contribute to the salvation of souls, and the conversion of people to Christianity. There is little good to come out of proving one's theological legitimacy, and defending one's own tradition, if it does not contribute to our common task.<br /><br />Unfortunately, no matter how much I may sympathize with elements of Father Hart's vision - especially as he articulates it in other posts on the role of Anglicanism as a bridge between Rome and the East, based on the "branch" doctrine - Anglicanism cannot due this simply based on an intellectual argument.<br /><br />The Orthodox Saint John the New Theologian argued against other theologians of his time, who said that it was not possible to become perfectly divinized in this life, primarily through his appeal to the example of his own spiritual father. He knew that this level of sanctity could be attained, because he had seen it in his spiritual father.<br /><br />In this two front war you have described, the most effective weapons are not those of words, but of deeds. The best attack is to relentlessly pursue the grace and holiness of Jesus Christ. If each side involved in this "war" utilizes the same strategy, we will ultimately come to the same place, and we will all have won.Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04603402422216696381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-81243249543404305492010-02-24T20:53:59.187-05:002010-02-24T20:53:59.187-05:00charles,
I agree with your assessment, and I wond...charles,<br /><br />I agree with your assessment, and I wonder the same thing. Your comments in the earlier thread were also helpful to read.<br /><br />Fr. Hart,<br /><br />I like what you are writing and am heartened by the battle you are taking on through this blog. For myself, I do hope we will see a more clearly defined "English Reformed" Anglican church among the continuing sojourners. By that I mean in the stream of Cranmer and Hooker.Jack Millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18281378425270530573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-87756384743423014322010-02-24T20:42:36.931-05:002010-02-24T20:42:36.931-05:00"He maketh men to be of one mind in a house.&..."He maketh men to be of one mind in a house."Fr. Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18097549748468739701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-45239788514283734542010-02-24T18:52:23.596-05:002010-02-24T18:52:23.596-05:00Good post, Fr. Hart. Keep up the fight.
Someday...Good post, Fr. Hart. Keep up the fight. <br /><br />Someday, however, in order to solidify this "ethos" you hope to win, it will need formulary expression by either canon (perhaps diocesan) or book publication (a catechism perhaps). Ethos and law eventually have to work together. I am still considering if an 'unarticulated Anglicanism' can flourish under a broad catholicism. Somewhere it needs a confessional/ legal status, I believe, to prosper.charleshttp://www.anglicanrose.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.com