Here’s the video of yesterday’s sermon – somewhere along the way I’ve managed to lose the text, but the video is here in full. It is about Adam and Eve and about how their story is about now not then. There’s a nod to temptation and a chocolate boutique. I had the atonement in the back of my mind when I was writing it. Oh, and I included a semicolon. See if you can spot it.
What was the character of the debate? If one believes that the admission of women to the threefold ministry of the Church was an extension of an existing doctrine, not a doctrinal change, and that the dropping of the ‘filioque’ clause from the Creed wasn’t a doctrinal change either (nobody is compelled to deny that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son), the change to the doctrine of initiation was the most important doctrinal change made by the Scottish Episcopal Church not just in my lifetime but perhaps even in the SEC’s history. It amazes me that it seems to have been so uncontroversial.
(I don’t say I necessarily disapprove of the change. I’m quite happy not only for the unconfirmed but also for the unbaptised to be admitted to Holy Communion and would turn away no-one – except perhaps ++Judas Williams, and even then probably not – from the altar. But I can’t understand how a Church can teach two contradictory things at once.)
To a certain extent, saying two contradictory things at once is part of the consequence of having old liturgical formularies alongside modern ones, I think.
(If you are not going to say something new, what’s the point in producing something new after all).
The modern descriptions of marriage in the 2007 marriage rite don’t seem to me to be entirely consistent with the marriage rite of 1929, for example.
It is the way we live now.
Well, as I said, there were several of us who spoke against the change, for one reason or another but it was passed by a fairly high majority, I think.
It seems to me that there is just about every view about initiation into the Christian church that has ever been held is currently also held and practised in the Scottish Episcopal Church. Indeed, there are varieties of practice and procedure within congregations and even within families.
Fearing that the Anglican Communion does not have enough controversy, division and dissent, I must ask you to respond to the following questions: Gaiters – yes or no? Gaiters on Provosts (or Cathedral Deans) – yes or no? Gaiters on this Provost – yes or no? The picture on Bishop David’s blog will provide you…
I meant to say last week that I had a very pleasant hour and a half with Nick Cox. He is the lay rep at St Silas, our nearest (well, geographically!) Episcopal neighbours. We had a good conversation about things that matter. Anyway, he keeps a blog which can be found here: www.learningtowalk.blogs.com/ Go check…
From time to time, one finds oneself thinking about how one would vote in the House of Commons if one were there. Now, this is idle daydreaming, to be sure, but remember that I was actually a candidate at the last General Election. I set myself up for that daydreaming in the most public way…
He is risen indeed! Alleluia!
Leave a Reply