Comments on: Global Anglican Future Conference finally announced. http://www.benedictionblogson.com/2007/12/26/global-anglican-future-conference-finally-announced/ Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:07:00 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Bene Diction http://www.benedictionblogson.com/2007/12/26/global-anglican-future-conference-finally-announced/#comment-98016 Bene Diction Thu, 27 Dec 2007 19:12:09 +0000 http://www.benedictionblogson.com/?p=3577#comment-98016 Indeed, the name calling is not getting any better. Thanks for pointing out the Canadian movement, the issues and trajectory don't appear to be different on the surface. I honestly don't understand the conservatives and I appreciate you clarifying. Since they are so unhappy and this has been going on so long in Canada, it seems wise they leave and leave the denominational name also. What troubles me is the willingness of US churches to place themselves under church authority who is known to back and support draconian law in their home countries, due to traditional pet peeves. Again, I don't understand why there is an unability to chose a denomination suitable to their dispositions and beliefs. This ongoing battle appears to none-Anglicans as going far beyond 'orthodoxy' and well into the realm of power grabs (both liberal and conservative) and money. I understand the systemic fracture isn't clinical for those who are harmed. As Anglicans around the world talk this out, I see a lot of pain and that choices have been made. Indeed, the name calling is not getting any better.

Thanks for pointing out the Canadian movement, the issues and trajectory don’t appear to be different on the surface.

I honestly don’t understand the conservatives and I appreciate you clarifying. Since they are so unhappy and this has been going on so long in Canada, it seems wise they leave and leave the denominational name also.

What troubles me is the willingness of US churches to place themselves under church authority who is known to back and support draconian law in their home countries, due to traditional pet peeves. Again, I don’t understand why there is an unability to chose a denomination suitable to their dispositions and beliefs.

This ongoing battle appears to none-Anglicans as going far beyond ‘orthodoxy’ and well into the realm of power grabs (both liberal and conservative) and money.

I understand the systemic fracture isn’t clinical for those who are harmed.
As Anglicans around the world talk this out, I see a lot of pain and that choices have been made.

]]> By: joseph http://www.benedictionblogson.com/2007/12/26/global-anglican-future-conference-finally-announced/#comment-98015 joseph Thu, 27 Dec 2007 18:26:13 +0000 http://www.benedictionblogson.com/?p=3577#comment-98015 Bene, I find the IRD theories inadequate to explain the Canadian context of dissention. The parishes in New Westminster that declared themselves in “impaired communion” were at odds with the direction of their diocese before the IRD playbook came out. J.I. Packer hardly needs IRD’s concern over American national security, US foreign policy and the like in order to say that he and other Anglicans find themselves at a crossroads, and must choose their path. A number of years ago I had opportunity to have a conversation with him and other leaders of what might be now called - pick a rhetorical lever of choice – the faithful remnant, the schismatics, the continuing Anglicans, the IRD lackeys. Their message was simple: the current church has departed from its roots, and at a certain point choices will be made. Now the “full blown schism” (Bishop Ingham’s phrase) has come to Canada. And it was not imported. It was home-grown. Sadly, I find all that remains is to gain the upper hand in name-calling. This seems to be the thrust of so much commentary from Anglican bloggers: “Look kids, it was your mother who walked out, not me.”. Perhaps it is part of the institutional DNA of denominationalism born of the Reformation that such splits are inevitable. Keep us in your prayers. Bene, I find the IRD theories inadequate to explain the Canadian context of dissention. The parishes in New Westminster that declared themselves in “impaired communion” were at odds with the direction of their diocese before the IRD playbook came out. J.I. Packer hardly needs IRD’s concern over American national security, US foreign policy and the like in order to say that he and other Anglicans find themselves at a crossroads, and must choose their path.

A number of years ago I had opportunity to have a conversation with him and other leaders of what might be now called - pick a rhetorical lever of choice – the faithful remnant, the schismatics, the continuing Anglicans, the IRD lackeys. Their message was simple: the current church has departed from its roots, and at a certain point choices will be made. Now the “full blown schism” (Bishop Ingham’s phrase) has come to Canada. And it was not imported. It was home-grown.

Sadly, I find all that remains is to gain the upper hand in name-calling. This seems to be the thrust of so much commentary from Anglican bloggers: “Look kids, it was your mother who walked out, not me.”. Perhaps it is part of the institutional DNA of denominationalism born of the Reformation that such splits are inevitable.

Keep us in your prayers.

]]>