Article XX, what does it mean?

[Rurik]

I agree. A situation where a roguish group ends up remaining with no real consequences for their actions, and the others are the ones that have to leave, doesn't seem to indicate a robust ecclesiology. We don't seem to actually have any way to resolve a situation where there is a real impasse, people are being jerks, or even when people are actually out to manipulate the system.

I think the situation would be vastly different if the TEC of the USA was not bank rolling a large portion of the Communion's running costs.

 

[FireDragon76]

I agree. A situation where a roguish group ends up remaining with no real consequences for their actions, and the others are the ones that have to leave, doesn't seem to indicate a robust ecclesiology.

I'm sympathetic to TEC so it's hard for me to come out and condemn them as rogues, but on a global scale I can see how a lot of Anglicans in other parts of the world think they have a lot of explaining to do.

I should point out I don't think this is a pitch at all for Roman Catholicism on my part. Roman Catholic ecclesiology has its own share of problems, especially around the nature of the authority of bishops and synods vs. the Pope. It's the main reason I'm not Roman Catholic, I don't buy into the institutional model of the Church that Rome presents.

I suppose this is an area I am more comfortable with Old Catholicism... it has trended in a liberal direction and makes no bones about it, and there is, in theory, a commitment to a basic creedal faith without a Puritan legacy. But I suppose there are huge authority issues there too, considering that many Old Catholic groups in the US are fragmented- personally that doesn't bother me that much, as I do not believe the catholicity of a church is dependent on agreement with the rest of the world, which is one reason I don't see TEC as necessarily "rogues".

 

[MKJ]

I'm sympathetic to TEC so it's hard for me to come out and condemn them as rogues, but on a global scale I can see how a lot of Anglicans in other parts of the world think they have a lot of explaining to do.

I should point out I don't think this is a pitch at all for Roman Catholicism on my part. Roman Catholic ecclesiology has its own share of problems, especially around the nature of the authority of bishops and synods vs. the Pope. It's the main reason I'm not Roman Catholic, I don't buy into the institutional model of the Church that Rome presents.

I suppose this is an area I am more comfortable with Old Catholicism... it has trended in a liberal direction and makes no bones about it, and there is, in theory, a commitment to a basic creedal faith without a Puritan legacy. But I suppose there are huge authority issues there too, considering that many Old Catholic groups in the US are fragmented- personally that doesn't bother me that much, as I do not believe the catholicity of a church is dependent on agreement with the rest of the world, which is one reason I don't see TEC as necessarily "rogues".

I'd have said that the Old Catholics are in much the same position as the AC. I agree that the Catholic eccleciology is inadequate as well - my suspicion is that the tendency to schism that is so apparent in Protestantism is derives from that model.

'm not sure the issue with schism is that it means a group isn't correct. It's more that the Church is meant to be all in it together, as it were.

 

[MKJ]

I think the situation would be vastly different if the TEC of the USA was not bank rolling a large portion of the Communion's running costs.

Maybe. But in western countries generally, there is a fairly remarkable tendency to not enforce any sort of discipline on bishops or even seminaries, unless they do something which is really quite extreme, as in abusive or illegal.

Teaching clearly unorthodox doctrine or practice doesn't seem to cut it.

Since within countries that doesn't seem to be related to money issues, I am not sure that is really the central issue.

 

[Rurik]

Maybe. But in western countries generally, there is a fairly remarkable tendency to not enforce any sort of discipline on bishops or even seminaries, unless they do something which is really quite extreme, as in abusive or illegal.

Teaching clearly unorthodox doctrine or practice doesn't seem to cut it.

Since within countries that doesn't seem to be related to money issues, I am not sure that is really the central issue.

I was talking about communion as a whole rather then countries. As to with in countries I cannot not comment. In Australia we only have on place that most people would consider a seminaries and that is Moore College and that is most certainly with in orthodox teaching, the rest are in univeseties where there is no concept of conventional/creedal teaching. My uni does not and refuses to report to the Bishop on students and Staff are banned from being examining chaplains. Not much anybody can do about that.

I am sure the money issue does play a large part on the world wide forum.

 

[MKJ]

I was talking about communion as a whole rather then countries. As to with in countries I cannot not comment. In Australia we only have on place that most people would consider a seminaries and that is Moore College and that is most certainly with in orthodox teaching, the rest are in univeseties where there is no concept of conventional/creedal teaching. My uni does not and refuses to report to the Bishop on students and Staff are banned from being examining chaplains. Not much anybody can do about that.

I am sure the money issue does play a large part on the world wide forum.

Yes, I know you were talking about the Communion. What I am saying is that you can see almost precisely the same type of thing within the various national churches. The power structures at each level are largely reproduced in form and the way they are managed. Synods within diocese are similar to the way the national churches organize themselves, and the AC internationally also organizes itself in a very similar way.

At each level, we see similar behavior.

This leads me to think it is a problem inherent in the individuals or in those structures. I am inclined to suspect the latter has an important role.

 

[ebia]

I was talking about communion as a whole rather then countries. As to with in countries I cannot not comment. In Australia we only have on place that most people would consider a seminaries and that is Moore College and that is most certainly with in orthodox teaching, the rest are in univeseties where there is no concept of conventional/creedal teaching. My uni does not and refuses to report to the Bishop on students and Staff are banned from being examining chaplains. Not much anybody can do about that.

Confused. Are you saying that Ridley Melbourne, say, has no concept of orthodox creedal teaching?

I am sure the money issue does play a large part on the world wide forum.

Oft stated but I've yet to see anyone produce anything whatsoever as evidence

 

[Rurik]

Confused. Are you saying that Ridley Melbourne, say, has no concept of orthodox creedal teaching?

I have not met anybody from Ridley Melbourne so i am not saying anything about it at all.

Oft stated but I've yet to see anyone produce anything whatsoever as evidence

Well I cannot put my hands on it at this point but I remember reading an article about it around the time of the 1st Gafcon Conference. However this article states that the ECUSA at the time of writing supplies around 50% of the Inter-Anglican Budget. VirtueOnline - News

 

[ebia]

I have not met anybody from Ridley Melbourne so i am not saying anything about it at all.

You seemed to be trying to say that Moore is the only orthodox theological college in Australia. If you aren't saying that then I'm even less clear about what you are saying.

 

[Rurik]

You seemed to be trying to say that Moore is the only orthodox theological college in Australia. If you aren't saying that then I'm even less clear about what you are saying.

That is not what I said & you can stop misconstruing my words. Since you lack the ability to see what I am saying I will spell it out.

Given that (as far as I know) there is only one place of higher theological education that has some form of conventional philosophy & the rest of them don't. It is only possible to say if one is orthodox or not. This is because the rest of them don't measure if a person is or is not orthodox. That is left (rightly) in the hands of the Bishop and the Examining Chaplains.

How can a University/College be said to be orthodox or not when it is not measured? The simple answer is it cannot be.


Ebia what do you stand for? You spend a lot of time of STR saying that is "Anglican Fudge" and the like but you don't ever seam to make a stand for anything.

 

[Rurik]

What troubles me more is that the Articles do not mention the Holy Spirit to any significant degree, there is no understanding of the role of the Spirit in guiding the Church.

Also.

You don't think the Spirit can guide the Church through the Scriptures?

 

[Liberasit]

The Holy Spirit get a whole article to himself - article 5 - as well as being part of others, such as article 1.