anglicans spilt, oh no?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
anglicans have released a document, which i havent read, but is non binding (i dont remember christ doing many of those); which basically states that the newwestminster bishop stop marrying queers and gene robinsonh to stop being so public. it also asked for apologies. the american (primate?) told cbs news that "it is a typical anglican fudge". someone one qouted an amusing t shirt, and i kept back thinking the africans, indians and most latin americans will nto take a typically facile apology from the west; the west will continue to treat queers as the stereotyped "to be libreated next, aren't we special" and the africans and indians w. a colonial disdain; any attempt to be civil or go to the traditions will be lost, and that this document (and i might/will revise this when i get my hands on the fucking thing) is a declaration of war.

so lets talk about this

anthony, Tuesday, 19 October 2004 04:31 (twenty-one years ago)

I don't quite follow some of your stuff, Anthony, you seem to be implying that it is wrong for the Anglican Church to move down the road of ordaining gay bishops and clergy.

I would like if the Anglican Church split into homophobic and non-homophobic wings, if the homophobes can't be persuaded of the sinfulness of their ways.

DV (dirtyvicar), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 11:35 (twenty-one years ago)

The homophobic wing is the only one that actually bothers to go to church in any numbers

Serghei Daduismus (Dada), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 11:42 (twenty-one years ago)

Not in the UK, really. I think a split is going to be necessary, as I can't see any way around it. British Anglicans won't be held back from accepting all people into the church by old fashioned and homophobic doctrine, and the worldwide Anglican community can't possibly take that the west allows homosexuals into the clergy.

Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 11:45 (twenty-one years ago)

Nobody goes to Anglican churches in the UK anyway, Africa's where it's at

Serghei Daduismus (Dada), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 11:47 (twenty-one years ago)

Yes, of course. But if no-one goes here what does Africa care what the UK get's up to? I don't think the west is being imperialist by saying that we're fine with homosexuals, and even to say that Africa is wrong to pillory gay people. Not to tell them what to do, of course, but I don't see why stating a value as universally applicable is culturally disrespectful.

Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 11:50 (twenty-one years ago)

the west allows homosexuals into the clergy.

I may be mistaken but it was for ordaining a bishop that they took exception too.

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 12:02 (twenty-one years ago)

True, but I don't think they are happy with any of it.

Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 12:03 (twenty-one years ago)

Probably not. I think there was something about the clergy who attended his ordination were asked to apologize, which is getting a bit on the Monty Python end of reality.

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 12:07 (twenty-one years ago)

I don't know too many Anglican priests, but the ones I do know are gay. At my (Catholic) Jesuit school, I'd say easily half the priests were gay. The truth is that without gay priests, Christianity in the West, both Catholic and Protestant, would have been faced with an utterly untenable infrastructure problem years ago. This is the real tension of the gay issue in the West.

Jonathan Z. (Joanthan Z.), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 12:12 (twenty-one years ago)

I imagine there are rather a lot of gay priests outwith the West too

Serghei Daduismus (Dada), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 12:14 (twenty-one years ago)

The Bible is homophobic, there's no escaping from that, it's a fact

Serghei Daduismus (Dada), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 12:15 (twenty-one years ago)

No, I think you can escape from that. Old Testament Law was fulfilled at Christ's resurrection, so we only need to look at the New Testament for evidence. Romans I seems to be the only scriptural evidence, and all that shows is that St Paul had some odd ideas about homosexuals.

Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 12:17 (twenty-one years ago)

Also in terms of priorities, in regard to what main ideas and laws are most important, I'm pretty sure "don't have gay sex" comes in way after "love each other." Driving people away from your church over gay sex kind of seems like reversing the priorities a bit.

Maria (Maria), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 13:35 (twenty-one years ago)

The homophobic wing is the only one that actually bothers to go to church in any numbers

wrong, and kind of a nasty smear.

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:03 (twenty-one years ago)

Haha "kind of"! It's like you're taking understatement lessons from me.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:05 (twenty-one years ago)

It might be wrong and it might not be - kind of hard to prove either way tho isn't it?

Serghei Daduismus (Dada), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:06 (twenty-one years ago)

Stated fact on ILX turns out to be strawman shockah.

Onimo (GerryNemo), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:08 (twenty-one years ago)

kind of hard to prove either way tho isn't it?

my parents go to the largest Episcopalian church in their diocese, whose delegates voted for Robinson's ordination. So shut the fuck up, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about (non-shocker).

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:11 (twenty-one years ago)

Your parents are representative of all Anglicans in all countries all over the world are they? That follows doesn't it?

Serghei Daduismus (Dada), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:12 (twenty-one years ago)

your misinformed statements are representative of all Anglicans in all countries all over the world are they? That follows doesn't it?

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:13 (twenty-one years ago)

There's no use crying over spilt Anglicans, you two.

Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:16 (twenty-one years ago)

Evidence would suggest it's closer to the mark than your statement. Given that Anglicanism is in decline in both the UK and the US except for Evangelical forms of Anglicanism which are mostly hostile to liberal Anglican views. Half of all Anglicans, and growing, are in Africa where, tho individual churchgoers themselves may not necessarily be homophobic, their churches are certainly more "traditional" on homosexuality.

Serghei Daduismus (Dada), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:18 (twenty-one years ago)

... and the fact that Anglicanism is only really growing in Africa is precisely the reason why cowardy Anglican leaders in the UK are stabbing their American cousins in the back over this amtter

Serghei Daduismus (Dada), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:19 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm certainly not crying but I definitely am tired of how various ILXors make sweeping, declarative statements about people they've never bothered to talk to, nor know much of anything about. It's fucking annoying.

xpost - Dadaismus, go fucking TALK to members of the church, please. Not everything in the world is as clear-cut as what newspapers might have you believe.

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:21 (twenty-one years ago)

I live in England, I'm surrounded by so-called Anglicans! 22 million of them supposedly!

Serghei Daduismus (Dada), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:23 (twenty-one years ago)

yes and you're always whining about how much you hate the people around you, so that's very telling.

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:24 (twenty-one years ago)

How are the UK stabbing the US in the back? If the UK diocese elect a gay man, presumably because at least some non-homophobic anglicans attend churches, how is that stabbing them in the back? Should the Church of England not elect the best man for the job because African churches are more homophobic?

Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:25 (twenty-one years ago)

Aye right, I'm always whining about how much I hate the people around me. What was that you said about making sweeping, declarative statements about people they've never bothered to talk to, nor know much of anything about being, quote, "fucking annoying"?

Serghei Daduismus (Dada), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:26 (twenty-one years ago)

dude how many ILX threads of you complaining about London do you want me to dig up?

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:27 (twenty-one years ago)

Be my guest hstencil then compare it with ILX threads from every other ILXor who lives in London - complaining about London is what people in London do all the time.

Serghei Daduismus (Dada), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:29 (twenty-one years ago)

And I certainly don't do it anymore than anyone else in here

Serghei Daduismus (Dada), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:30 (twenty-one years ago)

Kevin - US Anglicans are being censured by the Church of England because of the ordination of an openly gay bishop - maybe I'm wrong but could it have something to do with the fact that evangelical and traditional forms of Anglicanism are on the rise while liberal Amglicanism is in decline?

Serghei Daduismus (Dada), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:31 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, Rowan Williams himself is a liberal, and a supporter of homosexual priests. In the UK liberal anglicanism is doing fine, and the Church of England is a 3rd of the Anglican Communion. I think Williams is wrong to censure the New Hampshire diocese (I think that's the one...) but he is attempting to keep the anglican communion together. Several of the things he has demanded from that diocese are actually meaningless, and he has not called for the Bishop to resign. He appears to have done the minimum he could get away with whilst keeping the African communion together. It's important to note that the US Episcopalians are completely autonomous, as are the other 30 or so churches that make up the Anglican communion, so they need not listen to Williams - but it would be difficult to maintain the communion. I don't see the problem as being that the evangelicals are taking over the liberal area, it's just that the conservative churches are growing and excercising it's power. The fact that the US and the UK churches are so in favour of homosexual clergy and bishops is a sign of just how liberal those churches are. Again, I do think Williams has misplayed, and this is a stalling action at best. If the homophobic churches continue to threaten to leave unless the liberal churches stop ordaining homosexuals, I don't see what choice there is but to allow the communion to split.

Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 14:52 (twenty-one years ago)

i blame st. paul

g--ff (gcannon), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 15:14 (twenty-one years ago)

anyway, at the end of the day the Anglican Communion is a church for heretical splitters from the one true church, so it does not really matter. Praise Tobit.

DV (dirtyvicar), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 16:53 (twenty-one years ago)

the real question is, will DV be the next pope?

MarkH (MarkH), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 17:15 (twenty-one years ago)

Blessed, blessed be.

DV (dirtyvicar), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 17:20 (twenty-one years ago)

Pape, de père en fils

Michael White (Hereward), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 17:30 (twenty-one years ago)

if i was a delegate, i wouldnt vote for robibson, this is what im saying b/w the milquetoast cente, the ego driven east, and the hidebound africa/india/etc there is nothing that can really be done

anthony, Tuesday, 19 October 2004 18:32 (twenty-one years ago)

but anyway, you are not an Anglican anyway, are you?

DV (dirtyvicar), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 19:18 (twenty-one years ago)

If the UK diocese elect a gay man, presumably because at least some non-homophobic anglicans attend churches, how is that stabbing them in the back? Should the Church of England not elect the best man for the job because African churches are more homophobic?

In the UK, bishops are appointed, not elected. Senior bishops are appointed by both the government and the church - to choose an Archbishop of Canterbury, the Prime Minister selects between two candidates put forward by the church. There is certainly a feeling in the evangelical wing of the church (who were very pleased by the appointment of Archbishop Carey) that Rowan Williams was deliberately selected by a government who wanted to liberalise the church.

Well, Rowan Williams himself is a liberal, and a supporter of homosexual priests. In the UK liberal anglicanism is doing fine

The fact that the US and the UK churches are so in favour of homosexual clergy and bishops is a sign of just how liberal those churches are

There was a great degree of controversy recently in the Church of England when a celibate gay man was appointed Suffragan Bishop of Reading, and was eventually forced to decline the appointment by Dr Williams, as a sop to the evangelical wing. Although the official C of E position is that it is only the act of gay sex which is a sin, this affair shows that this isn't what the evangelicals believe: they will not accept anyone who will admit to homosexual feelings even if that person never has sex.

The evangelical wing of the Church of England is, even if it is a minority, much more vocal than the liberal majority. It's also the only part of the church which is working hard to attract new members (with initiatives like the Alpha Course, which is heavily advertised on billboards country-wide). Some leaders of Reform - the largest formal evangelical group within the Church Of England - have gone so far as to say that they would not allow the Archbishop of Canterbury to preach in their parishes, because they believe his views are dangerously heretical.

The next big turning point in the Church of England may well be the appointment of the next Archbishop of York, who is also Primate of England. The incumbent, Dr David Hope (who was outed many years ago by Peter Tatchell but has refused to officially state his sexuality), is a liberal bishop who has retired to go back to being a parish priest.

caitlin (caitlin), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 19:25 (twenty-one years ago)

I dont think that Rowan Williams is really a liberal, i think Rowan WIlliams is a poltician.

tell me more about york, Caitlin.

anthony, Tuesday, 19 October 2004 19:30 (twenty-one years ago)

His sacking of Jeffrey John (said almost Bishop of Reading) was certainly a politician's action.

I have said pretty much all I know about York. You might want to try The Guardian's religion section.

caitlin (caitlin), Tuesday, 19 October 2004 19:38 (twenty-one years ago)

four months pass...
and now at the conference in newry, northern ireland the libs and the cons will not break bread w. each other (ie have communion together), pluse robinson put 2008s Lambreth Comission in England again, as opposed to South Africa.

Can i put the anglican church on my death pool ?

anthony, Monday, 21 February 2005 13:34 (twenty years ago)

my objection to religion is not really the "God thing", which no-one can prove one way or the other after all, let's be adult about it, but rather the fact that religious groups, like political groups, will insist on putting unity before justice. My respect for Rowan Williams went right out the window when he failed to stick up for Jeffrey John, the gay vicar who was his choice for Bishop of Reading. I so wanted him to say to the conservative wing of the church "If you don't like it, go ahead and leave, give it your best shot", but maybe I was naive to think there was ever the slimmest chance of that happeneing. Funnily enough, by not sticking by his principles he has basically nullified any chance of being remembered any longer than, say, Coggin, whereas if he'd had balls he would've assured himself of Henry VIII style immortality.

MarkH (MarkH), Monday, 21 February 2005 21:33 (twenty years ago)

yes, the principal role of the archbishop of canterbury is to be assured of your own Henry VIII style immortality

ambrose (ambrose), Monday, 21 February 2005 21:49 (twenty years ago)

what would you say was its principal rôle?

MarkH (MarkH), Monday, 21 February 2005 21:51 (twenty years ago)

problem is, Ambrose, I don't think most ppl in the Uk are really sure what its principal rôle *is* anymore. I would imagine that most would greet the question either with a shrug, or say that a (neo) Gothic edifice makes a nice backdrop for the wedding pics.

MarkH (MarkH), Monday, 21 February 2005 21:55 (twenty years ago)

Don't worry, they'll come back, they always do.
And when they least expect it, the Holy Father is going to drop a motherfucken BOMB on them. JP Part Two don't talk flack from no one, not castro, not Gorby and not even would be gunmen, NO ONE!

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 02:30 (twenty years ago)

four years pass...

Vatican welcomes Anglicans into Catholic Church

* Story Highlights
* Vatican opens door to disillusioned Anglicans wanting to join Catholic Church
* Married priests and bishops to be allowed to "enter into full visible communion"
* Vatican says "hundreds" of Anglicans have expressed interest in joining
* Anglicans can retain their rites while recognizing the pope as their leader

ROME, Italy (CNN) -- The Vatican said Tuesday it has worked out a way for groups of Anglicans who are dissatisfied with their faith to join the Catholic Church.

The process will enable groups of Anglicans to become Catholic and recognize the pope as their leader, yet have parishes that retain Anglican rites, Vatican officials said. The move comes some 450 years after King Henry VIII broke from Rome and created the Church of England, forerunner of the Anglican Communion.

The parishes would be led by former Anglican clergy -- including those who are married -- who would be ordained as Catholic priests, said the Rev. James Massa, ecumenical director of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

"This sets up a process for whole groups of Anglicans -- clergy and laity -- to enter in to the Catholic Church while retaining their forms of worship and other Anglican traditions," Massa said.

The number of Anglicans wishing to join the Catholic Church has increased in recent years as the Anglican Church has welcomed the ordination of women and openly gay clergy and blessed homosexual partnerships, said Cardinal William Joseph Levada, the head of the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Their talks with the Vatican recently began speeding up, Vatican officials said, leading to Tuesday's announcement.

"The Catholic Church is responding to the many requests that have been submitted to the Holy See from groups of Anglican clergy and faithful in different parts of the world who wish to enter into full visible communion," Levada said.

Levada said "hundreds" of Anglicans around the world have expressed their desire to join the Catholic Church. Among them are 50 Anglican bishops, said Archbishop Joseph Augustine Di Noia of the Congregation for Divine Worship.

While married Anglican priests may be ordained as Catholic priests, the same does not apply to married Anglican bishops, Levada said.

"We've been praying for this unity for 40 years and we've not anticipated it happening now," Di Noia said. "The Holy Spirit is at work here."

One interested group is the Traditional Anglican Communion, an association of churches that is separate from the Anglican Communion and has hundreds of thousands of members worldwide. The TAC in 2007 petitioned the Vatican for unity with the Catholic Church with the stipulation that the group retain its Anglican rites.

The TAC's primate, Archbishop John Hepworth of Australia, said in a statement Tuesday that the Vatican's announcement "more than matches the dreams we dared to include in our petition two years ago."

That is because the Vatican's move involves not only the TAC but other Anglican groups that want to unite with the Catholic Church, said the Right Rev. Daren K. Williams, bishop ordinary of the western diocese of the Anglican Church of America, which is part of the TAC.

The Vatican has yet to release all details of the offer, and the TAC's leaders will meet and discuss how to respond when it does, Williams said. But Williams said he believes much of TAC will respond favorably.

Williams, who also is rector of All Saints Anglican Church in Fountain Valley, California, said his parishioners have generally been "very warmly receiving" Tuesday's announcement.

"It is encouraging for them to know their worship experience wouldn't be turned upside down by the Roman Catholic Church," Williams said. "The person in the pew should see very little difference in the way we pray. We might be asked to pray aloud for any pope who happens to be in office, in addition to praying for our primate.

"Really, there'd be very little other difference."

The parishes retaining the Anglican rites would answer not to Catholic bishops but to regional or nationwide "personal ordinariates" who would report to the pope, Massa said. Those officials often will be former Anglican clergy, Vatican officials said.

The Church of England said the move ends a "period of uncertainty" for Anglican groups who wanted more unity with the Catholic Church.

Both groups have a "substantial overlap in faith, doctrine and spirituality" and will continue to hold official dialogues, the archbishops of Canterbury and Westminster said in a joint statement.

"Those Anglicans who have approached the Holy See have made clear their desire for full, visible unity in the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church," Levada said. "At the same time, they have told us of the importance of their Anglican traditions of spirituality and worship for their faith journey."

Preserving Anglican traditions, such as mass rites, adds to the diversity of the Catholic Church, he said.

"The unity of the church does not require a uniformity that ignores cultural diversity, as the history of Christianity shows," he said. "Moreover, the many diverse traditions present in the Catholic Church today are all rooted in the principle articulated by St. Paul in his letter to the Ephesians: 'There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism.' "

chief rocker frankie crocker (m coleman), Wednesday, 21 October 2009 21:56 (sixteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.