Wednesday, 2 February 2011

Now Read This

In the absence of anything from myself, I'd encourage people to read this article by Charles Raven:

Dublin and the Art of Dishonest Conversation

- a reflection on the recent Primates' Meeting in Dublin.

People are welcome to post comments here but PLEASE NOTE THE RULES BELOW:

When posting your comments please give a full name and location. Comments without this information may be deleted.


  1. Excellent article, thanks for linking to it, John. Evangelicals have some difficult and challenging choices to make. I sense a bit of urgency in his tone on that point.

  2. The interesting comment (for me) concerns what happens to the erstwhile open evangelicals who become bishops and then accept all kinds of unorthodox ministry in their 'patch'.
    Is this a reference to people like James Jones? Why does there seem to be no one like Michael Baughen today?

    Mark B.

  3. I heard Charles Raven speak at the "Mere Anglicanism" Conference last month. He has done his homework well.

    Most of us in the pews would appreciate some direction as to "whither Anglicanism." We love to worship the Lord in the Anglican style, but the substance is fast disappearing. The evidence of the fruits of the structures of the Church points out the need to gather up the non productive branches and pitch them where they belong.

    Still, there remains no clear answer.

  4. Thank you for the link John. I agree with Jake that "Evangelicals have some difficult and challenging choices to make." The key one for me is 'where do I draw the line?'. Women in leadership does not seem (to me!) to be a 'Gospel imperative' more a matter of 'church order'. However, same sex 'marriage', and ordination of practising openly gay people are in a different catagory and (again to me) are simply contrary to Scripture. As a life-long evangelical do I join with the 'no-women' side of the debate because it is the thin end of the wedge or do I still sit on the fence and wait for the 'Ordination of openly gay candidates' debate to come up? As it surely will at some point in the future.
    Still praying!!

  5. U.P.,
    I have been thinking, for a while, that what some of us may be facing is a transition from Operative Anglicanism, where you had actually orthodox clergy, parishes and an environment in which to practice Anglicanism, to what I have referred to as Speculative Anglicanism, where one lives in isolation from an environment friendly to, or tolerant of Anglicanism as some of us knew it. Someone I knew called it Private Anglicanism or Personal Anglicanism.

  6. RMB,
    The Prayer Book was used for private Anglicanism in the early days of this community. In those days there was not enough clergy to go around to small isolated towns in the US.

  7. U.P.
    I understand what you are saying. I am not speaking about the situations where one is moving into a new geographic frontier; rather, an environment where Classical Anglicanism is faced with extinction. You must go far and wide to find a proper Prayer Book service even in England and there are virtually no parishes left which use only the 1662 BCP. In the Soviet period in Russia there were underground, or what came to be known as Catacomb, churches. We may find something like this coming in the West.