Tuesday, October 2, 2012

10/2/2012: Anglican Ruminations

This is a set of interlocutations from those associated with Anglicanism in America.  The date here is 10/2/2012.  There's some light and some heat here.  Many questions are raised that will be updated as we go. 


 

Question. Let's suppose an Anglican church/mission exists. What prayer book should they use? 1928? If so, why shouldn't they use the 1892? Or, should they modify the 1662 and, if so, where should the modifications be? I have more questions coming.

Top of Form

Like · · Unfollow PostFollow Post · 2 hours ago

 

52 of 64

View previous comments


Donald Philip Veitch But on the larger question, for a non-Anglican, what reasons might be adduced to tell a youngster, "This is a place to be"? Say, reasons used with young college students without an Anglican background? That's a larger question while we live in Anabaptacostalism. I routinely exclude the oxymorons, that is, the Protestant liberals.



Charles L. Baker An important part of "Apostolic Succession" is apostolic doctrine. Bishops, especially, need to be thoroughly trained and examined before consecration. I am not sure what choosing them "from within congregations," unless a different polity is being suggested. Let the bishop be chosen at the diocesan gathering or chosen by the Archbishop, confirmed by the House of Bishops, then given to the diocese to vote on.



Charles L. Baker Strongly prefer the 1559, with minute changes to update language and punctuation.

about an hour ago · Unlike · 1


Hudson Barton Jordan has done considerable work on polity and governance in a hypothetical new organization. I have a copy.

about an hour ago · Unlike · 1


Donald Philip Veitch With re: to apostolic doctrine, an apostolic and Biblical confession needs to be in place, the benchmark by which wayward Bishops can be evaluated.

about an hour ago · Like · 1


Charles L. Baker Three Forms of Unity or the Book of Concord.



Hudson Barton The premise of wondering how to attract youth might be inherently wrong. The only firm objective should be to please the Lord.



Donald Philip Veitch These are good questions and we should keep the review underway. There are more questions in the queue. 3FU, can you imagine that in the back or front of a good BCP? Talk about upsetting Anglicans? They wouldn't not what it is or was? Or, why they are valuable.



Donald Philip Veitch Hudson, concur, youth aren't the benchmark in terms of seeking them. Rather, what is inherently in this or that mission work that warrants their attention. While retaining the essentials, the question is why should they be involved or attend (again, without dilution to attract them)?



Charles L. Baker Phil, the WCF would upset just as many! Ditto for the Book of Concord, There are still AC's who repudiate the Reformation.



Hudson Barton 3FU are fine but they a not part of any English heritage, and they are unnecessary, particularly if the WCF is included.



Donald Philip Veitch ACs, "let goods and kindred go, this mortal life also."






Donald Philip Veitch Wow, these are some rather bizarre concepts, but then, are we to follow Duncan? Poor Bob, in the last few years of ACNA leadership, has never mentioned justification by faith alone....not once. Or, Mangling Leo? Or, Lacey Keith? Or syncretist Ray Sutton? We have some interesting concepts here. As for a House of Bishops, a political creation, perhaps. As such, it's not de divino, but, is adjustable.



Hudson Barton We have to also reject the Laudians, or almost everything after the martyrdom of Cranmer. What they meant for Evil, God meant for Good.



Hudson Barton Absolutely NOT (going to ACNA). That would be completely inconsistent with these principles.



Donald Philip Veitch I'll have to take leave on the questions for the present, but will return later. More thought is needed here.



Charles L. Baker Where I attend, an instructive liturgy will be used, and a series presenting the Reformed faith has been started. You have to meet people where they are. Even many Reformed know nothing of corporate, responsive prayer, nor the benefit of set forms. Just the "pastor" making a pastoral prayer on the fly as if he is a priest!



Philip M. Lewis Donald Philip Veitch - I've been using the "Year Bible" reading program and the ESV along with MP & EP now for 3-4 years. I find it works really well. I especially like being in th...See More




‎17 y“Those who sanctify and purify themselves to go into the gardens, following...

one in the midst,zeating pig's flesh and the abomination and mice, shall come to an end together, declares theLord.

See More

about an hour ago · Like · Remove Preview


Hudson Barton There is nothing quite so edifying as speaking to the Lord in a proper 2nd person singular, so instructive as learning how to structure our thinking in a more classical (less modern) fashion, or so humbling as learning to pronounce a person's name as he would want. Desiring not to do these things is mere arrogance.



Charles L. Baker So much for revivalist/puritan arrogance!!!



Philip M. Lewis Hudson Barton - it took me a long time to figure this out. I will say language does change and English has lost the Germanic "familiar." The problem became when the KJV and the classic BCP was viewed as some specially God sent ecclesiastical language, that God cannot be otherwise worshiped. The Roman church tried that with Latin. I would say I find it "the best" and when I try to render it is something more "modern" it feels flat. There is a "genius" in the Reformers language we do not have the powers now to match - sort of like our Constitution - It is very difficult to improve on so just "do it." So I'm not picking an argument but believe we can be open to other options.



Jordan Lavender They should only used authorized forms of service in their Province.

about an hour ago · Like · 1


Hudson Barton Well Philip M. Lewis, if you insist upon "modernizing" the language or even allowing a modern version, then it's not just the lectionary you're talking about, but the entire BCP, including the Articles. I am quite sure it cannot be done without making it poorly or with a revisionist slant or both. Besides, it's pointless and writing a new Reformed Prayer Book makes any kind of revival of BCP worship a thousand times more complicated.



Philip M. Lewis The problem is we are coming from so many different "Provinces" and I would argue the liturgical jihad of TEC needs active resistance now. If we believe "lex orandi, lex credendi" ...See More



Jordan Lavender I would tell people in TEC, like myself, to use only the 1979 BCP instead of encouraging liturgical anarchy that exists in ACNA.



Hudson Barton If "repenting" means going back to where we got off track, then go back to the martyrdom of Cranmer, and for goodness sake set aside any and all notions of reforming Anglicanism or depending on leaders from their ranks for assistance.



Donald Philip Veitch Brothers, a break in the reading but returning. I'd like to take these posts of our's, put them into a MS document, and update at my blog. Here's why. There are good suggestions and thoughts that need nurturance. In finishing Judges today, is it not clear that "the Israelites" were an "up-and-down-crowd" with deliverances variously through 12 Judges, if you want to count that wayward, dissolute, and aberrant Samson as a Judge. Here's the point. We surely get episodic periods in Anglican history. It's not a "tradition" to be worshipped, but rather the "God" of our faith that is to be worshipped. When "Mangling Leo" of the REC fell off the cliff, he previously was rock-solid. But then, he replaced the "God" of the Bible with "traditionalism," to wit, everything "Anglican, good, bad, middling and mudling" was worshipped. We have a great heritage, but it is full of wicked sinners, incc

48 minutes ago · Like · 1


Philip M. Lewis Hudson - I'm not arguing against the "classic" BCP, but I believe the 39 AOR never assumes there can be but one "form" perfected forever and unalterable. You also assuming that change means "revision" when in reality bishops with jurisdiction can and should make changes in a pastoral way. Regarding your second post, it would seem to betray a despair that has lost all faith in God's continuing presence in the Church, no matter how many problems. Maybe this should be called "applying" Anglicanism. I think we are sufficiently "Reformed."



Donald Philip Veitch The first thing to be done is to get the scissors out and thoroughly drop, cut, remove and trash, if not burn, the stupid and incompetent Catechism in the back of the 1979 BCP. It is an embarrassment beyond words. "That" horrific and worthless piece must be immediately excised.

38 minutes ago · Like · 1


Hudson Barton Mssrs. Lewis and Lavender, if I recall correctly, you believe the "Reformed" church includes Laud, Bramhall and similar "high church" Arminians or persons like Parker who conceded an opening to their presence. No, it's not realistic to be talking about introducing the WCF or 3FU and yet imagining that any existing "Anglican" body would assist in the venture.



Jordan Lavender Those aren't Anglican documents and aren't binding on churchmen.



Jordan Lavender Mind you, the 1662 BCP was drafted by High Church Laudians...



Hudson Barton Yes, but you want to keep the '79 BCP, so that comment is just a head fake.



Philip M. Lewis Jordan - your point in the face of TEC's abominations and lawlessness are ludicrous, and I'm not trying to pick a fight or put you down. You are going to have to get more honest with the history and spirit behind 1979 and it's contribution to "this present darkness" (and I actually like a great deal of 1979!). Can you compare the "liturgical anarchy" of the ACNA with the liturgical anarchy that lawlessly forced through WO but with a "conscience clause" only to remove it in 1992 and said "get over it"? Do you not think the lawlessness exemplified in the change in the disciplinary canons are not designed to lawlessly silence any remnant orthodoxy? Now that the "ecclesiastical authority" (which can no longer rightfully claim to speak as either "ecclesia" or "authority") has designed to "ordain" transexuals (the epitome of confusion and rebellion over God's order in nature) and perform rights of SS "blessings", can you regard at all any pronouncement that comes from the General Convention or 815?? This is the problem. They have formally caused schism and officially become apostate. It is now official. It is a very different thing than when I was ordained. The only thing left for the godly remnant is to leave en-mass realizing they are church and must leave what has become Antichrist just like confused Christians had to leave the buildings and preferment's under Arianism after the majority of the Catholic bishops declared that no longer a viable expression of Christianity.



Jordan Lavender I think it is more lawless to use an unauthorized book than to use the authorized liturgy of your Province.



Jordan Lavender Hudson Barton, I don't like the 1979 BCP but I am against liturgical anarchy. If your bishop hasn't authorized a form of service you have no right using it in the public worship of the church.



Hudson Barton Yes, well it was more lawless for the Jews to remain in Egypt.



Donald Philip Veitch Wow, WCF and 3FU aren't Anglican documents, therefore, they are not binding. So much for Reformation. But, a great discussion to tease out ideas and thoughts. I'll stick with the WCF as--essentially--right Biblical thinking.

24 minutes ago · Like · 1


Jordan Lavender No, they were written during the Interregnum, when there was no Anglican C of E. I think Presbyterianism is a better fit for you



Donald Philip Veitch Jordan, who says Presbyterianism is a better fit? I've been a regular BCP user by day and night for 32 years. Because you think otherwise? Sorry, time for doctrinal maturation, especially for the Bishops.



Hudson Barton Suffice it to say that Lavender thinks it better to remain "Anglican", and he will defend his exclusive use of the label. This is why I insist upon abandoning the label. Bickering with Lavender is a waste of time.



Jordan Lavender The WCF doesn't contain anything that is binding on churchmen, it hasn't been adopted by any Province, contemporary or historical.



Donald Philip Veitch I love these rebukes. They are of the essence of wisdom, that is, taking rebuffs and rebukes and addressing them. One thinks of SCOTUS Justice Roberts in this respect. When John Roberts was in DOJ and acting as Solicitor General, he was always assigned with destroying the government's case, as a preparation for assertion of the government's case before SCOTUS. He mastered objections to his own case and answered them. He's brilliant.



Donald Philip Veitch Jordan, that's an issue that needs a response. Why hasn't any Province, contemporary or historical, updated their skeletal AOR?



Philip M. Lewis Hudson - NO! I merely recognize they are part of our history for good or ill, just as Henry VIII was and I believe he is most likely roasting in hell. Even though I think Jordan is confused about 1979 and "ecclesial authority" he has a point about WCF (though you'll have to tell me what 3FU represents other that something short for something obscene.) We do have our own catechism and the BCP itself is a sufficient guide (though I think there is a lot of commonality with the WCF). Yes we are "reformed" but we always need to keep in mind that "Reformed" is an adjective meant to modify "catholic" - and it is that greater body that is known as "catholic" that we need to find our place and use our "charism" to further "reform" for the true church is "semper reformata."



Donald Philip Veitch Gentlemen, retain your gentlemaniless, as you've been doing, in the interests of scholarly thought. Poor Jordan has taken leave of us to his loss. I think we should debate this with good lawyerly thought and be able to sustain any good, scholarly, and deliberative objection. Again, Justice Roberts, a man who played chess while other Justices were playing checkers (a phrase from Forbes, Jan 2011), was a master of the argument, knowing his own weaknessess and strengths of a given case.



Hudson Barton 3FU stands for the 3 forms of unity; Belgic confession, Heidelburg catechism and the Canons of Dort. They are fine but they're not English and they don't represent an improvement over the 42 Articles, the 1595 Lambeth Articles and the Westminster Confession. The latter two of these were designed to reverse the mistakes of having replaced the 42 Articles with the 39. We just have to reinstate the mind of Cranmer.



Donald Philip Veitch Hudson, this axis of inquiry--3FU, WCF, 39 and 42 AOR, 1595 LA--merits analysis. In the analysis, applications to the wider Anglican history that adopted only the 39 AOR without maturation.

8 minutes ago · Like


Hudson Barton Mr. Jordan is a Laudian (Arminian) and astoundingly he refers to himself as "Reformed". He seeks to preserve or remake the institution of visible Anglicanism (from precise age between Cranmer and 1662) even at the expense of the invisible church. I've been round and round with him on the matter, and am convinced it won't change.

4 minutes ago · Like


Hudson Barton This will help your inquiry into the changes between the 42 and the 39. https://mywebspace.wisc.edu/dgehring/web/hist361/fortytwoarticles.pdf

2 minutes ago · Like


Donald Philip Veitch Arminianism has no place in Biblical Christendom, at all, and that should be said. Never mind American Anglicanism, but Biblical Christendom. In fact, this should be one of the issues that are confronted along with other issues.








Bottom of Form


OLDER POSTS



Farewell, I thought this was an Anglican group... I will leave you to your delusions.

Top of Form

Like · · Unfollow PostFollow Post · 19 minutes ago near Albany, NY

 


Donald Philip Veitch Delusions? That's your rejoinder? Puerile, sophmoric, and like a lawyer who can't address the objections, he quits the case. If you can't stand up to biblical, confessional and scholarly objections, what can you offer thinkers, other than recourse to "that's the way it's been done." With that logic, you should cease driving your car and revert to horseback.



Philip M. Lewis If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen... but while you may run, you cannot hide - especially from the apostasy that is TEC. And I'm still a priest in TEC and ordained at St. Peter's in Albany!



Donald Philip Veitch Philip, you are quite the character here. TEC, St. Peter's in Albany. Look forward to the on-going inquiries.



Philip M. Lewis I'm "repenting" of my past. Those are confessions of where I've been not statements of my commitments. ;-)

8 minutes ago · Like


Donald Philip Veitch Copy that re: you, but also myself too. The MP/EP/Litany/HC takes us there.

7 minutes ago · Like

Bottom of Form

 

6 comments:

  1. D. Philip Vietch ... still task master of the sharply pointed pen and fencing master of the word ... how the heck are you dear brother
    +Del Murray

    ReplyDelete
  2. Phil .. did I sign in correctly or am I being held prisoner while the Parliament votes my fate ???

    ReplyDelete
  3. Holy moly, hot jacamole! Whoa! I'm fine. Very retired. Live a quiet and retiring life, although attend a few local classes. Unhappily ensconced in a TEC Church, but unobtrusively and without conflict. Who needs conflict? Ah, no Parliamentary prison for you, Del. Welcome. How the heck are you?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I am blessed beyond words but not retired .. that is aparently for the sinless ... we sinners must labor on until the we are cleansed from the Treasury of Merit .. or something like that :-)

    I chuckled at some of the propositions put forward by poor brother Lavender before he played Jeronimo and bailed out. Poor lost soul.

    How can you abide worship in a pagan temple ??? Oh .. wait .. their presiding says there is more than one way to get to heaven so I guess its ok that your a Christian and your in there ... ha ha

    ReplyDelete
  5. How do you post to this group ?? I never could figure out blogs !

    ReplyDelete
  6. I alone post here. Comments can be posted although moderated. Scholarly guest articles, ahem, hint, hint, ahem, would be entertained, for example, by you.

    ReplyDelete