Saturday, 5 May 2012
St Boniface Trust has held a prize essay competition for people to write on the subject of Why I am an Anglican and believe I shall remain so. The winning entry by Natacha-Ingrid Tinteroff is available to download.
Last week I linked to two articles about a new translation of the Bible. Savi Hensman also writes about it for Ekklesia in Approaching the Bible with an open heart.
Adam J Copeland writes for The Huffington Post about Acts 8:26-40: Castrating Our Customs .
Giles Fraser writes for The Guardian Goodbye, St Paul’s. Hello, St Mary’s.
Posted by Peter Owen on
Saturday, 5 May 2012 at 11:00am BST
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Church of England
Curious that the winning essay about the importance of Anglicanism doesn't mention the proposed Anglican Covenant even once.
I guess the reason for this, Malcolm, is that most Anglicans in the pews just don't know what the covenant is all about - that's why they are so easily persuaded of its seeming benefits when it comes to a vote in Synods.
I much enjoyed Giles Fraser's piece, describing his 'new vision' of the Church after being totally accepted by his new parishioners of St.Mary's, Newington. I'm sure the smaller parishes of the Church of England are often more 'on the ball', pastorally, than some of the larger edifices - because they have no reason for existence - except to proclaim:
'The great Love of God as revealed in the Son'.
Some of us still love you, Giles!
About Ms Hensman's article about the new translation of the bible: she remarks that the AV is "not always reliable." I beg to clarify. The Authorized Version was based on the "Textus Recepticus," which represents families of manuscripts available at the beginning of the 17th Century. Allowing for differences in English usage developing in the years since its publication, the AV is a scholarly, painstakingly reliable translation of the TR. The Qumran trove rendered some of those manuscripts obsolete, leading to the production of the RSV. Nevertheless, the excellence of the work of the 1611 version can scarcely be overstated despite the decadence of some of the material available to the translators.
I am a dyed in the wool Anglican. However, I found the winning essay churlish and deeply uncharitable towards Roman Catholics. One would think that by this point, we need not define ourselves negatively against Roman Catholics, but positively as the Anglican Way.