quote:

---

If the U.S. and Canadian churches agree to the request it could be seen as the first step toward a threatened break up of the united Anglican Church after 450 years.

"We as a body continue to address the situations which have arisen in North America with the utmost seriousness," the Church said in a communique released late on Thursday at the end of a meeting of the world's Anglican leaders in Northern Ireland.

"We request that the Episcopal Church (USA) and the Anglican Church of Canada voluntarily withdraw their members from the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC)."

---

Traditionalist?, yes, but nonetheless very powerful.

Now this. I have no doubt as to the "rightness" of the North American branches, and I think the Church of England is not far behind. Yet we have the African and Asian branched so vehemently opposed, and I do lament the loss of the world-wide fellowship.

One of the most confusing aspects of this: one of the things that has driven me away from the Anglican Church of canada in recent years is the increasing "fundamentalism" of many parishes. Go figure.

[ 25 February 2005: Message edited by: James ]

If the North American and British churches are concerned with actual morals and doing the right thing, they will tell the African and Asian churches to go fly a kite.

Mind you, it's neither here nor there to me — I haven't darkened the door of an Anglican church since it was made plain to me that my "lifestyle" was "not acceptable" to them. I've gone my own way since, and found I haven't missed the ACC (Almost Catholic Church) since. So they can do as they wish, as far as I'm concerned. Unlike some Catholics on this board (no offense intended) I found it to be a clean break from my church, and no longer identify myself as an Anglican at all, "lapsed" or otherwise.

It's nice to see them modernizing, for the sake of people still in the church, but I bear no loyalties or allegances at all to the institution.

*dusting off hands*

[ 25 February 2005: Message edited by: Hephaestion ]

- snip -

[ 25 February 2005: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

2. Some statements by the Archbishop of Canterbury at a news conference today:

- "We still face the possibility of division, of course we do," Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams said after a crisis meeting of 35 leaders of Anglican national churches."

- "That's not going to go away. Any lasting solution, I think, will require people to say somewhere along the line, `Yes, we were wrong.'

Statement by Michael Ingham, Bishop of New Westminster

"But Hutchison conceded that a permanent schism with the global church, which is made up of 38 national churches and 77 million members, is now
a more likely possibility.

Regardless, the issue is gigantic, enormous and other words. The next Great Schism is occuring in our life. Not just in Anglicanism and the Church of England, but to Catholicism too. And I feel that it is going to be a break of the old world and North America from Asia, Africa and the Central-South Americas.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Papal_Bull:
If you want to get into providence, this is all God's scheme, and it better work out.

---

If I am going to be "part of God's scheme", it will not be a result of temporal eccliasiastical politics. I have pretty much made my peace, and it has prescious little to do with how one or another archbishop may vote.

But, worldly religions do still have a powerful effect on world affairs. I have children, and potentially grandchildren who will bear the brunt of whatever this world becomes. I had seen a unified and liberally thinking church as a powerful influence in making that a better outcome. This development diminishes that hope.

[ 01 March 2005: Message edited by: James ]

quote:

---

The next Great Schism is occuring in our life. Not just in Anglicanism and the Church of England, but to Catholicism too. And I feel that it is going to be a break of the old world and North America from Asia, Africa and the Central-South Americas.

---

I'm curious as to why you place the geographical lines there, PB. If there's a schism coming in the Catholic Church as well, i can't think of anything worse than being cut off from communion with the majority world and ghettoized into a "progressive" church representing only the wealthy countries -- the sad fate that may await many Anglicans, if this schism-in-the-making continues.

It seems to me that there are more than a few extreme conservatives in Europe and North America. The Pole and the German who run the church are hardly paragons of progressive thinking (nor are the Cardinals from Canada, for that matter). The Episcopal Church USA is already heading towards schism as dioceses in Texas and elsewhere choose the path of hatred and exclusion in defiance of their own church. The same in the New Westminster diocese, where parishes have already split from the diocese over their refusal to accept gay people as fully equal human beings. On the other hand, you'll find plenty of progressive thinkers in the Catholic Church in the global south, even despite the decline in liberation theology. If there's a global schism coming, i don't see it comign on geographical lines, but doctrinal ones that cross borders.

[ 01 March 2005: Message edited by: Boom Boom ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Coyote:
And I suppose, Boom Boom, that I'm asking for a Church with that explicit mission. What, is this agnostic/atheist with a liturgy fetish asking too much? I mean, I'd even tithe!

---

quote:

---

an outstanding mission effort called the "Primate's World Relief and Development Fund"

---

- At your command all things came to be: the vast expanse of interstellar space, galaxies, suns, the planets in their courses, and this fragile earth, our island home; by your will they were created and have their being.

- From the primal elements you brought forth the human race, and blessed us with memory, reason, and skill; you made us the stewards of creation.

I dunno, when I hear this stuff, I think of myself mellowing out at the film "2001" or listening to "Also Spach Zarathustra". Far out, groovy, man.

[ 01 March 2005: Message edited by: Boom Boom ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sarah:
Haha, we call number four "the Star Wars one".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by swallow:
On schisms: there is already one progressive church with the full richness of liturgy of Catholicism and high church Anglicanism: the Old Catholic Church split in the 19th C over the doctrine of Papal infallibility.

---

quote:

---

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The next Great Schism is occuring in our life. Not just in Anglicanism and the Church of England, but to Catholicism too. And I feel that it is going to be a break of the old world and North America from Asia, Africa and the Central-South Americas.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm curious as to why you place the geographical lines there, PB. If there's a schism coming in the Catholic Church as well, i can't think of anything worse than being cut off from communion with the majority world and ghettoized into a "progressive" church representing only the wealthy countries -- the sad fate that may await many Anglicans, if this schism-in-the-making continues.

It seems to me that there are more than a few extreme conservatives in Europe and North America. The Pole and the German who run the church are hardly paragons of progressive thinking (nor are the Cardinals from Canada, for that matter). The Episcopal Church USA is already heading towards schism as dioceses in Texas and elsewhere choose the path of hatred and exclusion in defiance of their own church. The same in the New Westminster diocese, where parishes have already split from the diocese over their refusal to accept gay people as fully equal human beings. On the other hand, you'll find plenty of progressive thinkers in the Catholic Church in the global south, even despite the decline in liberation theology. If there's a global schism coming, i don't see it comign on geographical lines, but doctrinal ones that cross borders.

On schisms: there is already one progressive church with the full richness of liturgy of Catholicism and high church Anglicanism: the Old Catholic Church split in the 19th C over the doctrine of Papal infallibility. Its pretty much Catholic in most ways, with the exception of having no rules against what people do with their own bodies. Rather charmingly, it traces its apostolic succession through the Roman Catholic Bishop of Condom. Seriously.

---

Yes, John Paul and Ratzinger aren't the most enlightened guys in the world. And sure there are reactionaries in North America, and progresives in the third world. However, everything I've read about these issues in the past ten years or so leads me to the conclusion that, in general, liberal attitudes toward social issues are far more prevalent among parishoners and clergymen in the industrialized nations than they are in the third world. In most reports I've read about conferences etc where gay ordination(for example) is discussed, it basically breaks down, albeit unoffically, along industrialzied/third world lines.

All this puts liberals in a bit of a bind, because they're the ones who usually claim to be the most sympathetic to the sensitivites of the developing world. But on issues like gay ordination etc, the third world church is basically saying to them: "if you're so bloody opposed to cultural imperialism, why the hell are you trying to shove your sinful lifestyles down our throat?" I personally don't agree with these sentiments, but that's neither here nor there.

You're correct, of course, that many local churches and parishes in the west take a reactionary position on social issues. But consider: let's assume that half the Anglicans in the white English-speaking world are reactionaries, and the other half are progressives. Or 60% reactionary and 40% progresive if you think that's more accurate. The point is that it's more-or-less an even match, and the progrssives would at least have a fighting chance if the debate were confined to the west. The scales become considerably more lopsided in favour of the reactionaries, however, when you take into account the worldwide Anglican church as a whole. And I'm pretty sure that the western reactionaries are quite happy to ride the coattails of the third world to victory on these issues.

There was an hilarious moment at the 1998 Lambeth conference when John Shelby Spong, the former Episcopalian bishop of Newark and a leading liberal, said in regards to the social conservativism of African churches: "they've moved out of animism into a very superstitious kind of Christianity". Suffice to say I don't think the Africans took it too well.

[ 03 March 2005: Message edited by: voice of the damned ]

Breakaway Anglicans make gains

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hephaestion:

Interesting you should mention these folks, Swallow. Did you also know they have no problems with gay priests/bishops, etc.?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RosaL:

What about women priests/bishops etc.?

---

RosaL, I'm sorry I re-opened an old thread, but I was trying to be thrifty. You're responding to a post by Heph which will be three years old tomorrow, and Heph hasn't posted here for almost two years. My fault.

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

RosaL, I'm sorry I re-opened an old thread, but I was trying to be thrifty. You're responding to a post by Heph which will be three years old tomorrow, and Heph hasn't posted here for almost two years. My fault.

Anyway, any comment on the latest chapter in who owns the Anglican churches in Canada?

---

No problem. I was just making a really obvious point and it was off-topic, too, so - my apologies.

About the real topic: it's uncomfortable to find the rich and powerful part of the world on the right side of this issue and (apparently, and with notable exceptions) the poor and powerless on the other side, though the churches of the global South are being pushed and supported here by some people who are anything but poor and powerless, and not from the global South either.

Nope, that still wasn't the real topic! As far as the real topic, I have to admit ignorance. I don't know enough about how the Anglican church works to have an opinion. I know where my sympathies lie, of course ....

What frustrates me is this: These people whose consciences are obliging them to leave have managed to live with all kinds of diversity in the church, all kinds of things which, surely, some of them must have disagreed with. But "same sex blessings" - they'll leave over that. They keep saying it's "the last straw". Well, it looks suspicious to me. Another obvious point

[ 01 March 2008: Message edited by: RosaL ]

One of the frequent questions raised by moderate and progressive Anglicans is how this phony wedge issue is a line in the sand while the "conservatives" are prepared to wink at all sorts of internal contradictions over other issues such as remarriage and divorce, the ordination of women, usury &c.

The "conservatives" understand that the ordination of women is not a wedge that works for them, so they are pretty quiet on it. Yet they were caught out a couple of months ago when the head North American bishop tied to the Primate of Nigeria was asked about women's ordination and essentially had to answer that there was no assurance to be had for ordained women.

Finally, there is a very disturbing Atlantic article about Christian - Muslim relations in Nigeria which includes some highly disturbing statements attributed to the Primate of Nigeria.

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

Same-sex blessings split Anglicans;
Ottawa and Montreal bishops take steps toward allowing the practice

Not marrying them, mind you - just "blessing" their union. Marriage is still too avant-garde for this church.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm:
Rome wasn't dismantled in a day.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm:
Technically, Henry sought and obtained annulments, not divorces.

---

Breakaway Anglicans come together [lol, that's a good headline too...]

quote:

---

Two parishes that broke away from the Anglican Church of Canada over same-sex marriage are coming together in St. John's this weekend to hear about the support their movement is garnering across the country.

The splinter group doesn't agree with the blessing of same-sex marriages, an issue being hotly debated by the church. ...

Harvey said there is an effort to create a new Anglican body in North America — one that will represent the beliefs of orthodox Anglicans who are against current liberalization of the church.

---

More information can be found at sites like thinkinganglicans.org

In any event, the point of my "Rome wasn't dismasntled in a day" is that Anglicanism has always been moving away from Rome and towards a non-papal catholicism.

As in: