He suggested that mission is what really holds the Anglican Communion together – the 38 national and regional Churches throughout the world that are in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury (and usually with each other). Mission, he suggested, is equally if not more important than church structure and doctrine.
Thanks, Fred, for clarifying that mission is more important than doctrine. Do you mean by that, perhaps, that the ACoC has finally come to Jean-Paul Sartre’s existential view that existence precedes essence and, therefore, what it believes is actually defined by what it does?
Or is it just that you have no idea what you are talking about and that’s why we are in this mess.
The second one.
When asked the same question, Desmond Tutu replied what holds us together is that “we meet”. To which the questioner responded, “pretty thin glue”.
Hiltz’s response may seem more substantive, but it still sounds a lot to me like salvation through works. Or like the return of “liberation theology”, which is more political than spiritual.
David, this got me thinking about the Canterbury Communion’s possible future and purpose if we establish a doctrinally-based Communion within the Communion.
Question for discussion:
As social mission seems to be the Canterbury Communion’s priority anyway, might orthodox Anglicans continue gathering at Lambeth in good conscience, strictly for the purpose of coordinating international aid and relief?
3 Noli
Why not meet with the Red Cross, they have a better track record for relief efforts?
Peace,
Jim
The Anglican Communion: Oxfam at prayer?
In this statement, I posit that Hiltz is revealing a fundamental misunderstanding of the gospel (although he has lots of company in modern evangelicalism). The gospel is a proclamation of good news; the good news that Jesus stood in our place and took the penalty for our sin; that He died and rose again. Although Christ’s command to love God and love your neighbour are often assumed to be part of the gospel, they are just a restatement of the law. Law without gospel is a death penalty, and good works save neither the doer or receiver. Only after the gospel is received and the sinner has been justified do good works have eternal value (Articles XII and XIII).
IRT #4:
Because donations to the Red Cross indirectly support Red Crescent Societies.
7 Noli
First, your suggestion is “coordinating”, not funding.
Secondly, If one was interested in partnering with another denomination for aid and relief, why not the Mennonite Central Committee or the Sally Ann?
Peace,
Jim
#6 Warren,
I suspect that Fred, along with most of the rest of the ACoC leadership, no longer believes that the gospel is true. So what they have done is employ newspeak, silently redefine the word ‘gospel’ to suit their purpose and – soldier on. In fact, I am quite sure they are quietly working their way through the entire bible. They finished Romans 1 a while ago; it’s only a matter of time before we see the Gooder Translation sponsored by the Ministry of Truth at the ACoC.
David (#9), I agree with your assessment, but I think the problem is not a new one. Almost 100 years ago, J. Gresham Machen wrote:
These words ring even truer today.
#10 Warren,
Agreed: the rot is deep and old. The J. Gresham Machen assessment is spot on and is very much in accord with J. I. Packer’s Eastbourne talk which I’ve just finished listening to. He also says that God is squeezing the liberal church in Canada, as one squeezes pus from a boil (my paraphrase) – a notion that I find rather appealing in a gruesome sort of way.