American Anglicans blink
It seems schism in the Anglican communion has been avoided with the Anglican church in the USA agreeing to the Communion’s requests.
Advertise
-
Books
-
What Ireland did right (and what it needs to do)…
It is difficult to believe now that one country recently sent 19 delegations to Ireland to study how well our economy was managed. The revelation that our model of economic management featured positively in political and economic discussion in countries including Estonia, Greece and Scotland may also come as a surprise. As we survey the [...] read our review »
-
A poem for the day – Launching the Whaler Juan Peron
A Belfast epic, and one of my oldest poems, the opener of my first collection, Grub. The gist of the story was found in Moss & Hume’s Shipbuilders to the World: 125 Years of Harland and Wolff, Belfast, 1861-1986, which tells how Eva Peron was due to launch a huge whaling vessel in Belfast, built [...] read our review » -
Children of the Revolution (Bill Rolston)
What was life like for children of political activists during the Troubles? A new book by Bill Rolston and published by Guildhall Press during the summer has collected together the stories of twenty Children of the Revolution whose parents’ activities – and in many cases, imprisonment – had a significant affect on childhoods and life [...] read our review »
-
I suspect that all we have heard is really only the blast of the half-time whistle in this match and though the conservatives may be crowing over their apparent lead at this point there will be no winners at the conclusion and relegation to a different league is inevitable for one side or the other.
Given that the membership of the American Episcopal Church fairly explicitly refused to back down on this issue at their last general convention, this may well not be the end of the story.
There is excellent blogging on this subject at http://thinkinganglicans.org.uk/
How can two walk together if they be not agreed?
Time for the evangelicals to split and allow the liberals to continue their drift into agnosticism.
Thw Watchman: “Time for the evangelicals to split and allow the liberals to continue their drift into agnosticism. ”
The problem holding the ox and the ass at the plow is that the liberals hold a goodly number of the bishops and, hence, control the property of the more conservative congregations, with a few exceptions — some old churches pre-date the establishment of the local hierarchy and have control of their own assets.
If my invisible friend told me where I could and could not put my willy, I’d get a new invisible friend.
There are of course several evangelical Anglican congregations who contribute so much to the various dioceses that they can exert financial muscle. An example is the churches of St Aldate’s and St Ebbe’s in Oxford who were able to keep Jeffrey John out of Reading by threatening to take their money elsewhere.
I agree with The Watchman: they ought to split.
There are several thousand Christian Churches, big and small, in the USA. One or two more won’t make much difference.
Splinters IMO are better than a couple of monolithic Churches, such as the RCC and the Church of LDS. The latter tend to fall victim to their own expansionism and power-lust.
The Watchman,
I was of course referencing your first post. We were both typing merrily around the same time.
“Splinters IMO are better than a couple of monolithic Churches, such as the RCC and the Church of LDS. The latter tend to fall victim to their own expansionism and power-lust.”
Unfortunately Christ was of the opposite opinion.
John 17:20-21
20
Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
one 1st Cor 6:17, Eph 4:4, Eph 5:30
Whatever foolish decisions are taken the true Church will prevail.
Sorry.
I believe that it is a truism that “you can’t put the genie back in the bottle”.
Good thing too, else we would still be burning witches who had the audacity to float.
Conor Lavelle,
No matter what Christ’s opinion was, I think you’ll agree that most of the faith-based mischief in the modern world is caused by the major religions.
The Catholic Church is seldom out of the news where scandal is concerned. Islam is perhaps the greatest threat faced by civilization. Compared to them, Anglicanism is a pussycat.
I think it has a lot to do with being too dogmatic. Smaller denominations (unless they’re nutter sects) tend not to get in other peeps’ hair.
*I think you’ll agree that most of the faith-based mischief in the modern world is caused by the major religions.*
Not half as much bother though as was caused in the last century by militant atheists whose genocides left the religious troublemakers in the ha’penny place.
Harry Flashman,
Try defining “atheist” before you bring up the last century. I think you’ll find there were precious few causing mischief. Don’t forget that Joe Stalin imposed atheism on much of Russia. Look at today’s Russia and the former eastbloc countries. They’re arguably more religious than we Europeans.
However, I believe my argument stands re the main religious players du jour. You won’t find many Quaker or Methodist cabals flying jets into tall buildings.
If you think the Khmer Rouge and the Chinese Peoples’s Liberation Army were massacring millions in the name of advanced Buddhism or that the KGB and the Red Guards were offshoots of the Russian Orthodox Church well there’s not much I can say to enlighten you Dawkins, however I take aboard your point about who the mischief makers are today.
Harry Flashman,
If I say that one set of gods was replaced with another does that make sense to you?
Under Stalin, literally tens of thousands of priests, monks and nuns were slaughtered in the Soviet Union.
Conor Lavelle,
Did you know that Stalin wasn’t an atheist?
What you seem to be saying is that anybody who murders someone because of a political ideal then religion is to blame, a bit weak Dawkins I think.
Harry
If I can offer my twopenny’s worth, I think Dawkins point (and I apologise if I’m misinterpreting) is that blind devotion to an ideology (particularly a Utopian ideology), whether religious (like Islam or Christianity) or secular (like Communism or Nazism) is pretty much the same thing, and tends to have similar consequences.
If you’ve ever had conversations with fundamentalist Christians and fundamentalist Marxists, it’s quite spooky how similar they sound. Different beliefs perhaps, but the mentalities are almost identical.
Correct Dawkins – Stalin had his confession taken on numerous occasions when experiencing self-doubts or turbulent times. Indeed when he became involved in revolutionary politics he was training to become a priest.
Thank you, Stiofán and Ziznivy.
I think it’s true to say that peeps like Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and other megalomaniacs had a lot in common with the Roman Caesars: their people imagined them to be gods.
And it wasn’t too long ago that the Japanese emperors were so regarded. Correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t the Nepalese “royal” family also fancy themselves as divine or semidivine?
From “Landmarks in the life of Stalin” published in Moscow 1940:
G. Gludjidze, a boyhood friend of Stalin’s relates: “I began to speak of God. Joseph heard me out, and after a moment’s silence said: ‘You know, they are fooling us, there is no God….’â€
Gludjidze reported: “I was astonished at these words. I had never heard anything like it before. How can you say such things, Soso?†he asked Stalin, who replied:
“I will lend you a book to read: it will show you that the world and all living things are quite different from what you imagine, and all this talk about God is sheer nonsense.â€
“What book is that?†his friend inquired.
“Darwin. You must read it,’ Joseph impressed on me.â€
A few pages later, another person who was in school with Stalin, said of what they were taught:
“…in order to disabuse [i.e., free from deception or error] the minds of our seminary students of the myth that the world was created in six days, we had to acquaint ourselves with the geological origin and age of the earth, and be able to prove them in argument; we had to familiarize ourselves with Darwin’s teachings.â€
Conor,
I quote:
Read the full article by Jon Nelson here.