Comments: Reform on the Revision Committee

Well, he would say that wouldn't he!

Posted by Jeremy Pemberton at Monday, 16 November 2009 at 7:03pm GMT

Wonder if Reform will fire its female trustees/and or council members?

Posted by J. Michael Povey at Monday, 16 November 2009 at 7:09pm GMT

'Do you not see, how these Christians love one another?'

Well, no, one doesn't.

Food for thought, surely?

Posted by john at Monday, 16 November 2009 at 7:26pm GMT

"The decision of the General Synod’s Revision Committee to back away from proposals to give opponents of women bishops a way of staying in the Church of England "

What Double-Speak! There's no doubt that the OOW *already* have "a way of staying" in the CofE. What they want is a completely independent Church-within-a-Church.

***

"the number of large evangelical churches which the Church of England now risks losing..."

One more time: individuals---and groups of individuals (large or small)---may leave (and Vaya con Dios). "Churches" (in the sense of parishes, w/ the parish buildings) may NOT.

Posted by JCF at Monday, 16 November 2009 at 8:02pm GMT

This shows clearly why dialogue is so frustratingly difficult. This is such an unexpected take on things that one wonders whether we live in the same universe. Where do we begin, if we really want to stay together, even if uncomfortably together?

Posted by Joe at Monday, 16 November 2009 at 8:59pm GMT

"unbiblical..." Judges 4:4 and following.

Posted by Lois Keen at Monday, 16 November 2009 at 10:26pm GMT

"It may be that in the providence of God, the result of the Revision Committee's decision may be the reverse of what they intend: that this unbiblical move to put women in positions of headship in the Church will fail. Reform will renew its commitment to work towarsds this outcome" - Rod Thomas, REFORM -

So, at last; we have Reform's great fear exposed -that 'women might be put in positions of headship in the Church' - a move they see as 'un-biblical'.
This is just one more piece of evidence that Reform, and like-minded opponents of women's ministry in the Church, are scared to death of what the Holy Spirit might be pushing as God's purpose: to use all the human resources God has created (including women and gays) to preach the Good News of God's love for all people.

Where Reform, and other societies in the Church who want to banish women and gays from any sort of voice in Church government and ministry, were quite prepared to back the work of the Revision Committee when it looked like they might buy into their agenda of prejudice; it is a very different story when Providence (and the will of the ground-swell majority) seems to have worked in favour of women and gays.

This is a classic case of "Man proposes, but God disposes" - or "My ways are not your ways", as many a biblical literalist might suggest.

Posted by Father Ron Smith at Monday, 16 November 2009 at 10:34pm GMT

I think it is important that Anglicans considering full union with the See of Peter spiritually prepare themselves by fully exploring the importance of the Eucharist. May I recommend Abbot Vonier's 'Key to the Doctrine of the Eucharist' for those interested. It is not by coincidence that the liberal MP, Augustine Barrell recognised that for Catholics "it's the mass that counts".

Once living eucharistically becomes one's bedrock, other difficulties become insignificant. Unity with Christ Jesus in the Eucharist overcomes all disunity. As a Catholic, the generosity of Pope Benedict in allowing Anglican and Latin tradition to become one in the Eucharist fills me with great joy and reminds me of the writings of St. Augustine:

"The Eucharist is our daily bread. But let us so receive it as to be thereby refreshed, not in body merely but in mind. For the power which we know to be therein is the power of unity whereby we are brought into union with His body and become his members. Let us be what we receive. For then it will be truly our daily bread."

Posted by Jakian Thomist at Monday, 16 November 2009 at 11:43pm GMT

'My ways are not your ways' cuts both ways, Fr Ron; just because you think you're right doesn't mean that you are.

And even if you ARE right, it doesn't mean that those who take a contrary position are wrong in fact nor wrong to do so.

The 1992 OWP debate began with David Silk reminding Synod that 'the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth.'

Posted by ordinary vicar at Tuesday, 17 November 2009 at 8:34am GMT

"Once living eucharistically becomes one's bedrock, other difficulties become insignificant. Unity with Christ Jesus in the Eucharist overcomes all disunity" - Jakian Thomist -

About this, Jakian, I am utterly convinced you are right. Whatever one's view about other things relative to the Christian life, the Eucharist has a basic resonance for all who love Jesus. His provision of this sacrament of his love has been, for me, the bedrock of my faith - ever since I discovered, before becoming a priest, the reality of Christ's Presence in the Eucharist.

All things else fall into place when our unity with Christ is accepted as the reality he meant it to be. Our unity with one another, 'en Christo', is that which no-one can take from us - no matter what is going on under the surface.
And I am an Anglican, and will remain so, D.V.

Posted by Father Ron Smith at Tuesday, 17 November 2009 at 9:16am GMT

Most Reform people don't belive in the Eucharist and when they celebrate Anglican communion they throw away the remains.

Posted by Robert Ian williams at Tuesday, 17 November 2009 at 4:25pm GMT

"...when they celebrate Anglican communion..."

RIW, were you afraid that we might think that they celebrate Mormon or Presbyterian communion if you didn't modify it? ;-)

Posted by BillyD at Tuesday, 17 November 2009 at 7:51pm GMT

Robert Ian, Jesus can handle it.

Posted by anthony at Tuesday, 17 November 2009 at 10:27pm GMT

I am no supporter of Reform. But Rod Thomas is quite right here, and I for one would support their position on needing pastoral provision (legal, not according to the whim of bishops, many of whom have already proved themselves untrustworthy to opponents).

Posted by Neil at Wednesday, 18 November 2009 at 8:03am GMT

"What has been overlooked is the number of large evangelical churches which the Church of England now risks losing – not to Rome, but to independence..."

I honestly do not understand threatening, "Give us what we want or we'll abandon Anglicanism in favor of some congregationalist scheme." Why do they think this would sway their opponents?

Posted by BillyD at Wednesday, 18 November 2009 at 3:54pm GMT

BillyD - most likely because it threatens the blessings of Establishment, which as you well know are threatened enough already.

Posted by anthony at Thursday, 19 November 2009 at 12:30am GMT

Particularly as most of these large evangelical churches have not been paying their quota for years and also operating as independent of the local diocese. For example, Jesmond Parish Church (Reform affiliated), Newcastle upon Tyne has about 1,000 in attendance and employs and licenses its own clergy. It has also planted a church in the Diocese of Durham. Schism in all but name...

Posted by Robert Ian williams at Thursday, 19 November 2009 at 5:35am 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.