For all those who get the winter blues. The solstice is past. Here comes the sun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muFOeZSIC2U
5 responses to “Heresy hunting”
-
It is probably helpful to be clear about the distinction between “dogma” (which is best understood as the definition of orthodoxy and of heresy, of the things it is mandatory to affirm and the things it is forbidden to affirm) and “church order” (the rules about how people are to conduct themselves). These are related but by no means the same thing.
“Doctrine” is a third thing again, to my mind. It is the body of teaching that the church affirms but is much more extensive and changeable than dogma.
Of particular relevance is who has the authority to pronounce on these things. Denominational authorities quite properly establish church law and discipline (this needs to be done and there’s nobody else to do it) but would go beyond their proper sphere (in my view) if they tried to establish new definitions in the field of dogma.
-
I feel the need to separate praxis and doctrine, but I suppose that is probably a minor heresy in itself, in a church that hides its doctrine in its liturgy. Although I suppose the deftness of the ‘McCarthy Liturgy’ has maybe sidestepped that pitfall as deftly as an 18th century non-juring bishop side-stepping western orthodoxy and the rest…
-
To a degree I think it is a matter of tradition. Anglican churches have tended (and it is only a tendency) to insist of orthopraxis. Church of Scotland churches have tended (same health warning) to emphasise orthodoxy of belief, call it doctrine or dogma. St Andrews is not of course a C or S institution, but it used to be, certainly in my day, and to a degree in yours, heavily steeped in C of S ethos. St Mary’s trained C of S ministers and that was ALL the training they got, because then they knew Orthodoxy.
-
The links on this post have led me to think of this –
The Inner Party – The Outer Party – The Proles.
The model demands tight control of the middle class, with ambitious Outer Party members neutralised via promotion to the Inner Party or “reintegration” by Miniluv, while proles can be allowed intellectual (and sexual) freedom because they lack intellect. Winston nonetheless believed that “the future belonged to the proles”. Wikipedia.
-
There was most definitely a C of S ethos at St Andrews in my day [67-71]. Robin Buchanan-Smith was running a packed college chapel and one president of the SRC and one president of the Union were St Mary’s men who went on to ordination and, in one case, to be Moderator of the Kirk. Perhaps they got their orthodoxy from Matthew Black at St Mary’s and their skill in future clerical politics from their student posts…….
Previous Posts
-
Elaine Cameron sums up
Please that synod is interested in Gender language Purpose of Audit was partly to open up conversations and she is pleased it has done so.
-
Gender Audit Motion is proposed by Norma Higgot
And debate begins. Nancy Adams: Welcomes audit. Draws attention to the qualitative aspect. She is the one female on the finance committee (which disperses grants). She does not bring only financial competence but different ways to perceive the problems. Women and men approach things differently. Argues for a closer look at the qualitative aspects. Asks…
-
Gender Audit
Synod begins hearing the report of the recent Gender Audit. Elaine Cameron says we have done this because of what we think about social justice. It is also about the economics of mission.
-
Primus sums up:
Says ther eis still not rush. Aware of an instictive reticence. Does not feel there is a gradualist movement into the Covenant. Says links between moratoria and covenant are not clear. OUr ability to be helpful to rest of communion depends on our abilty to enage with this in our own life.
Leave a Reply