Comments: FCA: follow-up

It saddens me to read of the disillusionment of the Catholics. But it is clear that it was always an unholy, tactical alliance; and not based on the religious impulse or desire for personal warmth and fellowship.

Also perceived 'liberals' of any stripe are spoken of with disrespect, which makes me very sad. So there is a lot of splitting and projection. Unity and good feeling based on excluding others who are seen , not just as holding different views, but as culpable.

A tragedy for the religious spirit and impulse. Must it be like this ?

Posted by Rev L Roberts at Wednesday, 8 July 2009 at 10:57am BST

All this has me reaching for my Krishnamurti again, and wondering just how much space there is for my humanity on such a confined and stylized stage as (established) Christianity.

The rigidly pro- and anti- rhetoric in this and in many other cases is often expressed out there in the blogosphere, at the till, in the pub and on street corners in such an ignorant and puerile way that just to enter the fray is to tempt irrationality to usurp the throne of human endeavour.

As Krishnamurti might have pointed out, both Dawkins and Nazir-Ali, for example, despite one being a scientist and the other a believer in, as one wag has put it, 'The Sky Fairy', are irrational because, their heads being full of a single world-view, they are not able to act spontaneously, with love, but rely only instead on fixed memory and stabilized experience, rather than following a way that is without resistance to life and free of prejudice.

I still feel that this is what Jesus was trying to tell everyone, in the context of his own time, or rather, I am still investing time and thought into believing this is so, and seeing Anglicanism as a mode of understanding that will enable me to carry on doing that - but really, this isn't so much a 19th C view of the world battling a 21st C one within the Church, as the whole world not actually having managed intellectual escape velocity from that former era.

Bleak days.

Posted by MikeM at Wednesday, 8 July 2009 at 12:50pm BST

"We are looking to going home to the Universal Church, in Communion with the Holy Father and half Christendom."

Not this Anglocatholic! I happen to think that the Bishop of Rome, while the senior Western prelate and deserving of a primacy of honour as a result, though I am a bit cynical of the fact that that is solely as a result of his being bishop of the capital of a long defunct Empire, hath no authority outside his own diocese, like any other bishop. Our breach with Rome, like our breach with other Christians, is a sin, but that's no reason for us to capitulate to the errors of Rome, we have enough of our own errors to fix.

Posted by Ford Elms at Wednesday, 8 July 2009 at 5:26pm BST

Well If Nazir-Ali wants a level playing field for sin and repentance, so be it. I will repent of being gay or having gay family or friends; or whatever else NA thinks is flat earth wrong about all that stuff; when he repents of being straight.

Deal?

Posted by drdanfee at Friday, 10 July 2009 at 12:14am BST

"We are looking to going home to the Universal Church, in Communion with the Holy Father and half Christendom."

I am afriad I do not understand what is keeping you. Why tarriest thou ?

But if you did 'go home' it might be as problematic as many a home; and no the dream come true you surmise. But perhaps that intuition is what keeps you here ?

Posted by Rev L Roberts at Friday, 10 July 2009 at 10:15pm BST

"I am afriad I do not understand what is keeping you."

Nor do I. I am an Anglocatholic and am quite clear on why I have not, and would not, swim the Tiber. I'd cross the Bosporus far more quickly, but ony when pushed. The reason is simple, I find more to disagree with in Rome than I do in Anglicansim, and about equal amounts in both Anglicanism and Eastern Christianity. But, if I honestly believed he was "Benedict, our Pope", if I honestly felt that union with Rome was some sort of ideal, I'd go unite myself with Rome. I can't imagine why one wouldn't, if one believed Rome's claims.

Isn't it odd that some Anglican Evangelicals find it easier to cross the Tiber than some Anglocatholics?

Posted by Ford Elms at Thursday, 16 July 2009 at 8:20pm BST
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.