It isn’t just Scotland where there are people getting excited about the possibility of marriage law being changed to be more equitable you know.
Here’s a video of the Dean of St Alban’s speaking out for the cause down in Englandshire.
Rather well, he does it too, I think.
Now, when did you last hear anyone else be as articulate, sensible and godly in less than three minutes?
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…….
The official Scottish Episcopal Church website has managed to astonish me once again. Leaving aside the broken links, the layout, the thin line of text, the missing graphics etc; even discounting all this, I still cannot understand why we are being treated to a photograph of Kevin Pearson's jowls.
This kept me entertained for five minutes:I've visited the counties in yellow.Which counties have you visited?made by marnanelmap reproduced from Ordnance Survey map databy permission of the Ordnance Survey.? Crown copyright 2001.
I don't usually blog about what I've seen on the television but this weekend's marathon from Channel 4 is worthy of comment. I remember missing the stage play of Angels in America both in London and Stockholm. What an extraordinary piece. What an extraordinary length – over 2 hours of epic trauma. It was like…
The call of Isaiah was the first reading that we had this morning and it is the one that I am going to concentrate on this morning. Let me give you warning too, part of the ministry of the word this morning will be silence. At the end of the sermon, I will be inviting…
Leave a Reply