Saturday, 29 October 2016

Opinion - 29 October 2016

Richard Moy Tearing down the Barriers of Corporation Sole

John Wraw, Bishop of Bradwell, Is our vicar-shaped mould too middle class?

Miranda Threlfall-Holmes Infant Baptism: An Anglican Model for Same Sex Blessings?

Andrew Lightbown Getting the leverage into R&R

Madeleine Davies Church Times Making evangelism the main thing, not an optional extra

Jayne Ozanne ViaMedia.News More Tea, Vicar?

Posted by Peter Owen on Saturday, 29 October 2016 at 11:00am BST | TrackBack
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: Opinion
Comments

Richard, John, Miranda - three great pieces and three great examples of diversity and equality.

(I've not read the other three yet.)

Posted by: Kate on Sunday, 30 October 2016 at 12:49am BST

A great piece from Miranda. Sadly, though, it woud seem that the very people - fundamentalists - who don't like Infant Baptism might be the very same people who don't go for S/S Blessings.

Posted by: Father Ron Smith on Sunday, 30 October 2016 at 10:52am GMT

(In response to the article by Miranda) My Facebook page this afternoon has a picture of the Bishop of Bangor blessing a new locomotive on the Tallyllyn Railway.

Posted by: Richard Ashby on Sunday, 30 October 2016 at 4:42pm GMT

Jayne's article hit a chord with me because she is talking about self-delusion among the House of Bishops. I think that's part of the problem with the reaction to same sex marriage. It's not just a theological issue, it requires the Church to admit that it is not welcoming to all and there are many senior figures who emotionally are going to struggle with making that adjustment. It makes me feel rather pessimistic.

So I then go back to Richard's article which highlights the problem with ordination. Clearly God's call wasn't to Richard or his wife separately but to them as a couple. It is the couple which should have been ordained not either individual. Richard thinks ordaining both worked, but I wonder if his wife feels as positive about that kludge as he does?

So now the question is consecration as a bishop. And once again it is the couple together who should be consecrated not either of them separately. But the Church simply cannot cope with that.

The big question the Church needs to be asking, I think, is if God can cope with gay couples marrying, sexually active gay priests, a call to be bishops given to a couple as a job share, then why can't the Church cope with such things?

Posted by: Kate on Sunday, 30 October 2016 at 6:51pm GMT

"So now the question is consecration as a bishop. And once again it is the couple together who should be consecrated not either of them separately. But the Church simply cannot cope with that." - Kate -

My last response got binned so perhaps another might make it:

Kate, you can't just keep on rejecting the tradition of the Church that has been agreed upon for centuries and seems best to continue.
There is a finite limit to fiddling with Holy Orders in the Church.

Posted by: Father Ron Smith on Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 11:08pm GMT

"Kate, you can't just keep on rejecting the tradition of the Church that has been agreed upon for centuries and seems best to continue.
There is a finite limit to fiddling with Holy Orders in the Church."

Ah, you mean like ordaining women or allowing gay people to be a bishop. Or a couple together but not separately...

Posted by: Kate on Wednesday, 2 November 2016 at 8:43am GMT

Fr Ron ....' it woud seem that the very people - fundamentalists - who don't like Infant Baptism might be the very same people who don't go for S/S Blessings'. I am not sure this connection works. The great majority of evangelical CofE clergy baptise infants. It is true it was once more of an issue some took a stand on. ON S/S blessing the picture is much more varied - but changing steadily. But may I urge you take more care using the label 'fundamentalist'. Those who struggle with infant baptism or s/s blessings are not automatically fundamentalists. If their concerns are theological they need engaging with theologically.

Posted by: David Runcorn on Wednesday, 2 November 2016 at 2:11pm GMT

Sorry, David (Runcorn). I should have been more specific. Perhaps the word 'Fundamentalist' was wrong in this particular situation. I was really talking about conservatives who reject infant Baptism as not strict enough because of a baby's presumed inability to make Promises for themselves.

Kate, by 'Tradition of the Church' here, I was referring to the tradition of treating people as individuals, rather than couples - which rather robs one of personal responsibility in ministry.

Posted by: Father Ron Smith on Wednesday, 2 November 2016 at 10:59pm GMT

"Kate, by 'Tradition of the Church' here, I was referring to the tradition of treating people as individuals, rather than couples - which rather robs one of personal responsibility in ministry."

You are being inconsistent I fear, calling upon tradition to argue the retention of things you don't wish to see changed but are happy to trample upon tradition wrt the ordination of women and election of gay bishops.

The Royal Family is burdened with tradition too. HM The Queen takes a very mature attitude to tradition. While tradition is valued, it is not worshipped. If a tradition is outdated, it will be changed. So for example, (albeit after some time for deliberation) the flags over Buckingham Palace flew at half mast for the late Princess of Wales, which was a major change to tradition.

Posted by: Kate on Sunday, 6 November 2016 at 11:00pm GMT
Post a comment









Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.