• Inspection of TISEC

    TISEC – the Theological Institute of the Scottish Episcopal Church has had the inspectors in (from the Ministry Division of the Church of England, since you ask) and they’ve just released their final report.

    There is not much for anyone’s comfort in the report as the inspectors indicated that they had no confidence in the governance of TISEC and in its formational ability. Both of these are hugely significant. The later means the ability of the institution to form people appropriately for the ministries that they are being trained for.

    I’m not going to say much about this at the moment. There will be many things said and many words spilled over this before the year is out. It is minority interest no doubt for most people who belong to the Scottish Episcopal Church. However, how we train people for ministry is fundamental to who we think we are. There’s a sense about, that this report means significant change – not only for TISEC but also for the church, not least for the Mission and Ministry Board who have the responsibility for overseeing this work. There are funding implications and pastoral implications to this and that’s why, even though I’ve never been shy of speaking about TISEC, at the moment, I’m saying little other than to suggest that anyone who cares about the Scottish Episcopal Church needs to read the report in full for themselves.

    And it can be found here:

    http://www.scotland.anglican.org/media/organisation/tisec/resources/TISEC_Final_Report_18_Feb_13.pdf

72 responses to “Baptism and the Churches”

  1. Erika Baker Avatar

    Thanks Kelvin and all for the interesting discussion. As a member of the Episcopal Church in the US, I only ever used the Baptismal Covenant in an argument against the necessity of the proposed Anglican Covenant. For me, the Baptismal Covenant is an assent to the New Covenant of Jesus Christ, so I saw absolutely no need of another covenant. In fact, I don’t see the Baptismal Covenant as something different from the New Covenant.

    With respect to whether Baptism or the Eucharist is a/the sacrament of initiation, wouldn’t the answer be both? In the early church, the person was baptized and received the Eucharist during the same service.

    Also, I wonder if people from other Anglican churches are aware of the great diversity of views held by Episcopalians in the US. That all the orders of ministry should be open to all the baptized seems to me simply a matter of the justice and equality that all Christians should strive for as members of the Body of Christ.

  2. Erika Baker Avatar

    Sorry, I’m posting on Erika’s computer, but the comment above is by me, June Butler (aka Grandmère Mimi).

  3. Alan McManus Avatar

    It’s so refreshing to read a discussion where everyone’s listening and learning through that dialectical process. Here’s my tuppennyworth: the disparaging mention of magic by churchpeople always makes my hackles go up – mostly as our Christian legacy of persecution of wise healers as witches is still largely unacknowledged and certainly unatoned – but also because the RC in me hears this as a facile Protestant jibe against metaphysics (if you want my views on that buzzword look here: http://robertpirsig.org/Alchemy.htm ) and though Vat 2 officially u-turned on slavery (yay! who says the RC church can’t change, eventually) it didn’t move away from an essentially sacramental view of Christian ministry.
    I feel that underlying this discussion may be a difference in sacramental theology. I hold the traditional view that through the creation, the incarnation and ongoing sanctification, the Spirit of God is at work metaphysically in the world and that means neither solely spiritually nor physically but betwixt and between. The RC church is just as guilty of virulent hatred of non-clerical women healers as others but the convivial nature of the relationship which sometimes occurs between Roman Catholic and ‘curandero’ (wise traditional healer) in Latin America is for me an affirmation of the ecological connections inherent in both cosmologies – though often forgotten in the RC church it must be said.
    The part of the SEC liturgy I find most alienating is ‘Lord unite us in this sign’. This speaks to me of cognition not communion. In these words I feel the lack of belief in a metaphysical reality. I feel that this discussion may have brought up a similar divide in concept about baptism: is it or is it not efficacious?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • How to Blog

    I met with someone this afternoon and was trying to explain the whole blogging thing. I don't know whether I succeeded. Here are 12 tips for how to be a good blogger: 1   If it is not up to date it isn't a blog.2   Remember, people believe you.3   Blogging is performance, not real life. (But…

  • New website

    I've been working o­n a new website. It is the new website for the Diocese of St Andrews, Dunblane and Dunkeld. It is just about ready to be seen by the world and should be launched by the end of the week. Anyone wanting a sneak preview can see it here: http://diocese.maniple.co.uk Tell me if…

  • Sermon – 9 October 2005

    This morning?s gospel reading is one of the most difficult to hear, especially for Scottish Episcopalians. The story of everyone from the streets being invited to the party is all well and good, but it offends our ears rather to hear of someone being thrown out for not wearing the right frock. I say that…

  • Unearthing St Francis

    Not for the first time, I find myself thwarted in an attempt to do an assembly at the local primary school. This time, they gave me the wrong time, so I turned up an hour after the assembly had happened. In the past I have turned up only to be told that on one occassion…