Comments on: Response to Rupert’s Land SSB motion from Bishop Don Phillips

By: Kate

Kate — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 22:57:17 +0000

Looking at the first ANiC synod, it effectively operated by prayerful consensus. Why can’t we continue to do that? If we don’t achieve consensus the decision is deferred.

On another point, I think that electing bishops has been pretty much an unmitigated disaster, to the point where we are suprised when godly people are elected. Why do we have to elect them? There must be a better way.

By: Jim Muirhead

Jim Muirhead — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 22:23:01 +0000

[5]
Rev Mac,
I subscribe to your sentiments completely. However, in the absence of Old Testament prophets to lead us, the Anglican church has opted for a particular form of democracy that utilizes synods.
When the discernment process shifts from the divinely appointed prophets to delegates, the training becomes crucial to the faithful continuance of the church.
It’s very easy to blame an Ingham or a Hiltz or a Bird. The question is: who voted them there and who supports their agenda in the courts of the church?
It starts at the top. Even today there are a handful of seminaries that are scripturally based. The anointed leaders of the ACoC are often woefully lacking in scriptural reverence and this is seen in the trickle down throughout the laity.
The church has not been teaching the Gospel and it is no wonder that synods display such an appalling record of faithfulness.
Hence: garbage in, garbage out.
Peace,
Jim

By: Kate

Kate — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:31:51 +0000

#8 The really sad thing is, Bishop Phillips almost certainly doesn’t think so.

Hey, Don’ Panic, have you seen the latest ANiC newsletter? Somebody has ~~stolen~~ borrowed your moniker.

By: ML

ML — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 19:36:14 +0000

“testing” for the mind of the Spirit at work in their midst
Should that be a small “s” spirit?

Thank you Rev Mac #5. Right on!

By: Ann V

Ann V — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 19:02:41 +0000

What he said! # 5 – exactly

By: Rev Mac

Rev Mac — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 16:51:27 +0000

We seem to have fogotten that the church is not a democratic institution – God is not shaped or influenced by a majority vote at any synod. We try to discern HIS mind and will, not the other way round. If Jesus were to have a vote among his disciples as to whether he should die on a cross, there would be a unnanimous vote of NO. In fact he seemed to have continually bucked any sort of majority vote against what he should do or be, from the Religious establishment of the time. Time and time again, a single voice of prophesy is the one that called for church reform, not the majority decision. We are not so much trying to discern his will, as trying to impose our will on Him, and it will not work.

By: Jim Muirhead

Jim Muirhead — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 13:44:41 +0000

If the synod has produced “faithful discernment”, I have to question just what kind of teaching led them there.
Over and over again we say this: two thousand years of consistent church teaching and scriptural authority needs to be abandoned. I suspect that a computer phrase is appropriate “garbage in, garbage out”.
Peace,
Jim

By: Ellie M.

Ellie M. — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:12:04 +0000

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think there was anything in the wording of the moratoria about General Synod being able to strike them down at will? And if there were, wouldn’t that also mean that border crossings can proceed unchecked once Synod has “acted”? After all, if they’re not holding up their end of the bargain, why should the orthodox?

By: Don't Panic

Don't Panic — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:00:16 +0000

…”‘testing’ for the mind of the Spirt at work in their midst.”

Do these folks have a special book of slick phrases given to them at consecration? I mean this is just the kind of idea that keeps biblically and theologically illiterate Anglicans in a fog. I mean, it sounds good. I think it could even work well as a headline in the Journal. But testing the mind of the Spirit… At local synods no less, on an issue clearly spoken to by the Spirit through the prophets already in Scripture, an issue with national, global, and ecumenical implications! Can anyone hear that snake hissing sound?

By: Steve L.-

Steve L.- — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 05:15:08 +0000

upon the passage by General Synod of an enabling doctrinal resolution

All these resolutions seem to worded to assume SSB will be passed at next GS and this is already a done deal. Gracious Restraint is just plain false advertising. 9½ years to the next (and possibly last Lambeth) so they don’t have look anyone in the eye till then and Fred XIII & company will only rant about incursions every chance. Come on guys, there must be a bishop you can ordain that will offend the Communion.