Well, there are two views, and they would probably be summed up in Acts 15:36-41.
One view says: Talk and talk and talk and talk...really never stop talking. Keep at it in persistence and faith, for you never know the future. (That's Barnabas)
The other view says: Are you kidding? What about Lambeth Resolution 1:10? That was 1998. They ignored that then. Why won't they ignore anything in the future? (That's Paul.)
And, like in Acts 15, we never really discover which is the best way forward. It just is.
Also read this re giving up on the church in THe Times online...
In a recent interview in the Sydney Morning Herald, Dr Jensen said that it would be legally impossible to engineer schism. The Episcopal Church of the US has already launched a number of legal actions against breakaway parishes and bishops. Dr Jensen said: "I can't. I'm part of a constitution, which is virtually unchangeable, of the Australian Church. I wouldn't want to. I love the Church. It would be bad for Christianity, bad for the Gospel." He continued: "I think there is going to be an evolution in the Anglican Communion. It has occurred. And what the Future Conference is going to work out is how to live best within that evolution. That's its business."
Archbishop Nzimbi backed this interpretation. Speaking at Gafcon he said: "Gafcon is going to help the Anglican Church. We are still Anglicans."
Archbishop Henry Orombi, of Uganda, also at the press conference last night, said: "What we are meeting for here is not to plan to walk away. We are meeting to renew our commitment, to renew our faith, to get a sense of direction of what we can be as Anglicans. We do not want to start a new Church."
Giving up on the church? not at all...in fact, it is precisely because these people are committed to the ongoing health and integrity of the church that they are not going to Lambeth.
5 comments:
Well, there are two views, and they would probably be summed up in Acts 15:36-41.
One view says: Talk and talk and talk and talk...really never stop talking. Keep at it in persistence and faith, for you never know the future. (That's Barnabas)
The other view says: Are you kidding? What about Lambeth Resolution 1:10? That was 1998. They ignored that then. Why won't they ignore anything in the future? (That's Paul.)
And, like in Acts 15, we never really discover which is the best way forward. It just is.
You are Barnabas, right?
Oh. suggestion: Kill the Word Verification. if you get spam, put it back.
I killed it, and I get spam once every 4 months. And I delete it.
kbiaa
Thats what I had to type to get this message on your Blog. And I wasted 5 seconds of my life doing it!!
:)
qivyvmo.
Hooley Dooley.
Also read this re giving up on the church in THe Times online...
In a recent interview in the Sydney Morning Herald, Dr Jensen said that it would be legally impossible to engineer schism. The Episcopal Church of the US has already launched a number of legal actions against breakaway parishes and bishops. Dr Jensen said: "I can't. I'm part of a constitution, which is virtually unchangeable, of the Australian Church. I wouldn't want to. I love the Church. It would be bad for Christianity, bad for the Gospel." He continued: "I think there is going to be an evolution in the Anglican Communion. It has occurred. And what the Future Conference is going to work out is how to live best within that evolution. That's its business."
Archbishop Nzimbi backed this interpretation. Speaking at Gafcon he said: "Gafcon is going to help the Anglican Church. We are still Anglicans."
Archbishop Henry Orombi, of Uganda, also at the press conference last night, said: "What we are meeting for here is not to plan to walk away. We are meeting to renew our commitment, to renew our faith, to get a sense of direction of what we can be as Anglicans. We do not want to start a new Church."
Giving up on the church? not at all...in fact, it is precisely because these people are committed to the ongoing health and integrity of the church that they are not going to Lambeth.
Post a Comment