I received following via email from a couple of people; there has been no official announcement as far as I know:
Rev. Vicky Hedelius and Rev. St. Clair Cleveland of Holy Trinity Anglican Church, Hamilton announced to their congregation last Sunday that they will be leaving the Diocese of Niagara to join ANiC; they will be starting services in St. John’s United (an evangelical church) this coming Sunday. Around two thirds of the congregation has gone with them. They turned in their licenses on Monday morning and were immediately received by Bishop Don Harvey.
Four years ago I left the United Church of Canada and became a member of the ACOC. I contined to blog on the U.C.O.C. website . The personal attacks ( many from clergy ) were unreal . They were far more vicious than any reply Randy has received . Although the website was monitored, the site had to ability to respond directly to the author . These messages were not monitored . Several messages I received were threatening . All because I did not agree with the liberalism that has overtaken this once noble institution . I no longer consider it a church) . Unlike Randy I had to sign off the blog for good because of the attacks.
My point is please do not turn this into that kind of blog. It doesn’t mean we have to always turn the other cheek if the thread contains falsehoods but please lets encourage civil debate. I think Winter Traveller’s last sentence in # 36 says it all.
P.S. Two years ago I left the ACOC for AniC .
Ragamuffin (#51), I hope you don’t take this as an attack (it certainly isn’t meant that way), but I don’t agree with your reference to the UCC as a “once noble institution”. I believe that, institutionally, the UCC represented a concession to liberalism from day one and that it contained the seeds of its own destruction at its birth in 1925. It does serve as a good example of ecumenism gone wrong. Were you tempted to join the Congregational movement of the late 80s?
Warren # 49, This is not the first time I have confused you. Perhaps it is because I am uneducated in the finer applications of the English language. I know that my ability to communicate is often hampered and yet it is one of my hearts desires. Such are the crosses our Lord provides. I am an old dog and thank you for your patience.
If anyone else agrees with Warren I would love to learn the why of it.
The essence of my argument is this: How can Christian people criticise others’ wrongdoings when they themselves are “lacking in the “essentials of the faith”
In #53, Stuck said:
I don’t think your argument relates directly to the Lloyd-Jones quote; I think he was attacking those who would wrongly use the authority of the church to teach things at odds with what the church has historically held true. That said, I’ll give you my opinion on your question.
None of us is without sin (1 Jn 1:8) and, because we are not perfect, we all lack in some aspect of our Christian walk. The Bible teaches in many places that we are to be discerning, to reject false teaching, and that discipline is to be exercised within the body of Christ. Therefore, one does not have to be perfect in order to be discerning, to reject false teaching, or to exercise discipline. This discernment, rejection, and discipline will often be received as criticism.
Now, just because none of us is without sin, it does not necessarily follow that we are lacking in the “essentials of the faith”. It depends on what you mean by the essentials of the faith. Some could take it to mean something as basic as affirming the truth of the Nicene and Apostle’s Creeds (without fingers crossed behind the back). What do you mean by essentials of the faith?
Wow all this because two priests dumped the ACoC. Imagine if a diocese did it?
We won’t become that kind of blog. Ever.
Gawk (#55), I plead guilty to verbosity.
Kate, Thank you for that. I was beginning to get worried. Having said that I am always willing to get involved in a good debate . Warren # 52 . No ,I do not take your message as an attack. Thanks for being candid. As a 25 year old renegade who one day decided to attend church for the heck of it I picked the closest one to my residence . It happened to be a United Church . I discovered Christ there and was smitten very quickly by the spirit . As the years passed and I somewhat matured I discovered that the Christ that I had become my best friend and comforter was being left behind in the decisions being made by the moderators . I had no choice but to leave. I did not leave with a” holier than thou ” attitude but in all good conciousness I had to leave . Same thing with the ACOC .
Ragamuffin (#58), an old family friend who was first a missionary to Africa and then a UCC minister for many years (I think he is still active in the ministry in his 70s) is a true minister of the gospel. My father did some lay ministry in the UCC in the 60s and 70s and even considered seminary for a brief time. I know that the truth can still be found in individual churches and I’m not suggesting that all who attend UCC churches are lost. My comment was directed at the UCC as a denomination/institution.
Warren, I agree completely . Take care.
We walk a fine line sometimes on this blog.
On one hand we encourage debate and want people to be free to comment. On the other hand, we don’t want, and will not allow, this to become a flame war.
Randy, I think you have been fairly treated. Your opening post was IMHO trolling, but it’s been allowed to stand. As well, others comments have been edited where needed. This is quite a long way from the modus operandi of blogs on the other ‘side’.
Fact of the matter is, most people commenting on here are coming from a particular position on the Current Unpleasantness. So, if you’re coming from a different position you’re not that likely to get universal agreement! That does not mean you are not welcome to comment – whatever lines you read between were on your own script, not ours.
Blessings,
Peter
Warren I had hoped that knowing of my comments in the past you might understand. The essentials of the Faith are not trifling or general in fact they are quite specific and can easily be identified by looking at our history and the successes of the prince of this world. The first clear failing of the church which continues to this day is our inability to recognize the power and necessity of unity which entwines itself with love and the incrementation of Faith. Until we can go back far enough to grasp these truths we cannot move on unto perfection.
Ragamuffin, Pray hard that this might be your last stop.
Gawk you to Pray hard that your #55 becomes unecessary after the Anglican Synod in June.
Stuck (#62), I will doubtlessly frustrate you again, but, to me, this statement is largely a riddle:
All I can discern from this is that you value unity above all else. Despite all your previous posts, I am truly at a loss to know what you really mean by this. Unity exists when there is agreement on fundamental or “essential” matters. What are these fundamental or “essential” matters? Presumably the “essentials of the faith.” Which leads me back to my previous question:
I have never responded to a blog before, but there seems to be a lot of anxiety about ACoC & ANIC (I am a proud member of ANiC); however we must remember in heaven there will be no ACoC, no ANiC, no Roman Catholics, etc – just people who have been saved and redeemed by Jesus Christ. Will Jesus know me or will he say he knows me not; so to quote words from a wonderful hymn I learned in Israel:
It all comes down to eternity – Where will I stand
And who’ll be waiting at the end of the line – Who is this man
And how can the son of G-d be born – What is His name
And how can I know if it’s really Him – Where will I stand
What choice do I have – What choice will I make
To walk alone – Or walk with You
I trust that no-one outside of the Anglican world will ever find their way to these blogs – the lack of charity on both sides is appalling. ‘see how these Christians love one another . . . ‘
And, with his vague and unsubtantiated attack (#66), Pat joins the club.
No – indeed I do not ‘attack’ anyone (vague or otherwise) – I simply observe and pray for greater charity. Our internecine feuds will do us all little credit.
Patrick
Again, unsubstantiated. Are individual comments sometimes posted to this blog that could be considered uncharitable? Yes. But you seem to be suggesting that the entire thrust of this blog is wrong. That it would be much better if Anglicans could just ignore God’s Word, paper over all their disagreements – no matter how fundamental – and get along. Am I misreading you?
Do you think the church father’s acted uncharitably in developing Creeds to counteract heresies? Do you think that process was collegial and “charitable”? Do you take issue with Martyn Lloyd-Jones comments in #40? How does 2 Peter 2 fit into your equation?
By the way, I could be considered someone “outside the Anglican World” (at the present time at least). I also think that the word “charity” has been so overused and abused by Anglicans that it has lost its usefulnessg.
With respect, I believe sir that you have misread me. Simply ‘getting along’ is not always best. The history of Christianity and of Anglicanism itself bears ample testimony to this. From controversy often may come light. Moreover, I disagree with your assessment of the early Church Fathers. They spoke plainly, forcefully, and with firm conviction to counteract heresies. The process of creating the creeds was – however – entirely collegial, as it was accomplished as a cooperative effort through the Ecumenical Councils.
I am truly sorry that you believe that the concept of ‘charity’ has lost its usefulness, but pray that it will soon be restored. This was – indeed – the purpose of my original posting.
Patrick (#70), I’m still at a loss as to what changes you want to see. Can you provide any constructive criticism of a specific nature?
Do you think your choice of the word “appalling” in your original post – without giving any example – just might be seen as a little provoking?
Although the participants in the ecumenical councils may have seen the process as collegial, I doubt that those whose teaching the Creeds were intended to counter felt they were being treated collegially – or charitably (even though many of them likely believed that their position was true). I’m in the early stages of a church history course and the ecumencial councils will be discussed in the next couple of weeks. I will bear your perspective in mind in my reading.
Any comment on #40?
Have you read the whole thread, Patrick? Good grief.
In the interest of not excessively extending this blog, I will acknowledge that my initial comment was not sufficiently clear, and has led to misunderstanding. Indeed, it may be read as uncharitable, although this was not the intent. For this I apologize.
Patrick (#73), I’m glad you stuck around – I know I can come on a little strong sometimes. I hope you see fit to contribute to other discussions.
Warren #64 – you said ” All I can discern from this is that you value unity above all else. Despite all your previous posts, I am truly at a loss to know what you really mean by this. Unity exists when there is agreement on fundamental or “essential” matters. What are these fundamental or “essential” matters? Presumably the “essentials of the faith.” Which leads me back to my previous question:
What do you mean by essentials of the faith?
As plain as I can Warren, I VALUE CHRIST ABOVE ALL ELSE. Christ values unity far more than the Church has ever done or yet realizes. Unity exists with likemindedness. nothing more nothing less. As for essentials of the faith, this is not my quote but one taken from material provided by you.
Patrick my humble opinion; this is the place were mostly honest persons sometimes duke it out – Just like Jesus did. Many, many are christians who have shown themselves to do so with love. In spite of human frailties such as frustration even outright anger. Stick around brother, participate for a while. I am confident you will see through and change your mind.
Stuck (#75), I still doubt that I understand what you are saying, but is this what you mean: So long as I say I value Christ above all else I am in unity with you even if I don’t believe the Bible is inspired, I deny the need to participate in the Lord’s Supper and baptism, I never go to church, and I routinely engage in a wide range of activities contrary to the 10 Commandments (and do not believe them to be sinful)? You probably don’t mean this, but I think your comment could be interpreted this loosely.
Let’s go back to your statement from #53:
I apparently don’t get it, so can you phrase things another way?
Apparently so, I shall give you the benefit of the doubt, but fear I shall only confuse you further.
The church Warren. The church. Unity exists with likemindedness. Jesus prayed “that they may be one, as we are one.” Likemindedness begins with two or three, than twelve than twenty ad infinitum. Being one with others is in my opinion a state of Grace whereby we enter into perfection. This can only be acheived when worked in conjunction with love and faith. Which you must have missed in my 62. I think you understand the premier requirement of Love. However faith may need further explanation. It is not just a belief system but an incremental tool that, supported by unity and love, becomes available in all matters of the church from soup to nuts (have I lost you?) another description for it that I have used in past blogs is “The Factor of Faith” To sum up, the church has failed and continues to fail to understand the depth and connection of these other two essentials of (to) the faith. You see Warren it is my very humble opinion that when the church sat at her first council she began to build a Box we call them creeds or edicts and using there own reasoning tried to explain or in some cases defend the church. Kind of putting God in a Box. Of course that’s impossible but what did happen was they built this box around themselves and in doing so shut out the growth of Unity, Love, and Faith.
I can almost hear you grinding your teeth, dear brother but please consider this; If you can come up with a better reason for the apparent successes of loosafur against the Church, from its beginning until the obvious of now. Combining that with the prophetic, were it is written that even the very elect of God would fail save the time be shortened. I would love to hear it. But if you require further enlightenment I fear that like Cohen’s Suzanne “I have sunk beneath your wisdom like a stone”
I think that there has been some confusion about the ancient church’s councils.
First, they were not polite affairs, nor where they what we might call charitable. There are many good reasons for this, the best I think is that they perceived the true evil of mis-truth and confronted it in this light. There are examples of fist fights and physical assaults taking place at these gathering. I guess they took what is said about God a little more seriously then we do (not that physical violence is definitive of seriousness).
Second, the purpose of the councils and their creeds was not to put God in a box, but to provide us with a fence for our thinking about God so that we would not cross lines and think thoughts that are inappropriate to think about God or ourselves. The creeds are to contain our thinking and fence it in, not God. While God is so much more then we can completely understand, in His revealed Word we can clearly see some things that we must affirm about God and ourselves as well as some things that we ought to deny about ourselves and God. What God wants us to know about Him is clearly and publicly made plain in His revealed Word, the Bible. Ultimately this is what fences in our thinking so that we honour and bring glory to God in our thinking about Him (which is what theology is in essence). The creeds are a reasonable (and fairly accurate and truthful) human attempt to speak the truth of scripture in light of specific things that were said about God that were false and dishonouring to Him.
your fellow unworthy servant in Christ,
Brian DeVisser
Thank you Brian and in our limited circumstance your “The creeds are a reasonable (and fairly accurate and truthful) human attempt to speak the truth of scripture” point of view is quite correct. I think it would be safe to assume that you would agree that the schismatic circumstances of the Church’s history is not what our Christ intended. Looking at the early church (still influenced directly by the apostles) the examples of life and the direction of growth was possible by the powerful impact of “the faith once given” and the direct empowerment of the Holy Spirit by the immense faith of the apostles. No sooner completed, it is my opinion, than the hand of the “Evil One” began it’s work. confusion, false teaching, dissention, anger and finally “human attempts” to make correction. When, in fact, we already had the recipe, Unity, Love, and Faith. Further, the debate between Arius and Athanasius which gave birth to the Nicene Creed was, again, in my opinion the hand of Evil working, here I speak of the debate not the result. Unfortunately as you know this did not put an end, but began a series of “councils” that eventually led to the so called great schism.
It is interesting to note the clear changes in the Church from its Apostolic influence to its human one. Herein rests the gist of my argument. The moment we shifted into human reasoning we began the long journey of the diminishment of Love, Faith, and Unity. Which as I am sure you recognize is reaching epic proportions in the world that God Loves. Although in this case the epic does not refer in any way to a hero but rather the opposite.
In summation; “To reason without the direct and overwhelming influence of any one (which I have said bears a direct impact on the other two) of the three impacting circumstances of the fundimentals of our participation in the Church is “anathema”
I must make an adjustment to a grave error. my last word anathema is far and away to harsh. We have Love and Grace from our God, praise and thanks be.
The word should be -dangerous-
Stuck #80, in your concluding paragraph you say:
Two things:
(1) You inserted an opening quotation mark without a corresponding closing mark. Is this a quote or your own words?
(2) What are the “three impacting circumstances of the fundimentals [sic] of our participation in the Church”? I cannot decipher what these three “circumstances” are from the rest of your comment. Or do you mean three fundamentals?
Here’s an example of why I often find it hard to follow your train of thought:
The second sentence is presumably an attempt at humour, but it adds unneccessary words and, in my opinion, detracts from the flow and clarity of your argument.
I apologize for playing the tutor, but you asked for feedback in #53.
No apology necessary Warren. As I have said in the past I accept full responsibility for the results in lack of education. Including my spelling. Yes it is my quote I obviously forgot the period and ….a second quotation mark? would the second quotation mark come after or before the period seeing this is a single sentence? Don’t hurt yourself now.
The three IMPACTING circumstances that you cannot decipher(?) are spoken of clearly they are Unity, Love, and Faith.
As for your last observation (a third thing by-the-way) I’m afraid you are wrong again. My use of the term “epic”, by definition refers to, “a long narrative poem which tells of the adventures and feats of a single hero” Which I hope now will make it more decipherable.
Stuck (#83), I understood the second sentence and the “epic” reference, my point was that it detracted rather than added to the flow of your argument. Just my two cents worth.
I missed the reference to unity, faith and love because, as per the dictionary definition, they are not circumstances (a condition or fact attending an event and having some bearing on it). I’ve never heard of unity, faith or love referred to as conditions or facts. Accordingly, I was trying to find three of something else.
I think the generally accepted convention today is to put the quotation mark after the period (although I definitely don’t get fussed about that).
Back to the original topic. I have just been told that the property of Holy Trinity is already earmarked for a high rise development with the church and the day care stuck in somewhere. Can anyone confirm this. The story is rampant in Niagara circles.
This is getting fun Warren, your two cents are down to a penny. It did most assuredly “add to the flow”. Although somewhat cryptic, I come by it honestly, as the person I admire most in life spoke often thus. Most of what I had to say was to do with the interference of Satan upon the lives of men. By using the term “epic” I drew attention to the size and responsibility for the proportion of loss. Feeling sorry for those who might have difficulty deciphering I added the final (still a little cryptic, gotta keep those teachers on their toes don’t ya know.) sentence.
As for your second point, “(a condition or fact attending an event and having some bearing on it). I’ve never heard of unity, faith or love referred to as conditions or facts.” My dear boy of course you haven’t, that is what my whole argument is about and I suspect why you continue to press the syntax rather than the substance.
Now I shall attempt to enlighten you a final time.
1 John:4 (I wrongly demanded that my brother read this in my #46 perhaps you should take a look)
17Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.
18There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.
“Herein is our love made perfect” sounds like conditioning to me.
Faith is both substance and evidence that, because it is incremental requires growth and in my opinion the single greatest threat to that growth is fear. Hmm conditioning here to, methinks.
Finally unity, growing both love and faith brings us to the final obstacle – self- we are called to be dead to self. It is only with this final (shall we say) growth spurt (as in conditioning) that we are able to practice, unto perfection, unity.
One final thing, this business is far to important -to me- to combine it with keeping the pot stirred, I’ll drop my paddle if you drop yours.
Good night and God Bless
Gawk – no surprise I half expected another casino – oop’s hope the Bish is sleeping.
Stuck,
I appreciate your response. I think the councils attempt was to in fact return to Apostolic teaching and stay clear from human philosophy and reason (in contrast to human reason aplied to God’s self revelation with support from the Holy Spirit). Certainly, at the time of the Reformation, the attempt was to return to Apostolic teaching, which we find in the Bible. When our thinking about God is formed by His trustworthy and commisioned authoritative messengers and what they say about Him, then we can find the unity in our faith, and because of that faith and unity we can find love for each other (since our faith includes that He first loved us).
These messengers are the Prophets and Apostles who are the authors of the Holy Scriptures. When our thinking is formed by the Bible and what it says, then we find faith, love and unity.
your fellow unworthy servant in Christ,
Brian DeVisser
If you want to be understood better, maybe you could try to be a bit less cryptic. Like Warren, I often find you very difficult to understand. Warren is obviously willing to make the effort – many other people will not be.
Stuck, depending on who drops it first, one of us is going to have only one oar in the water.
Brian again I agree with everything you said. However as with our current dilemma, there are negative and positive sides to every situation. This is the evidence of continuing dis-unity. As with your words ” the attempt was to return to Apostolic teaching,” ACNA is attempting the same thing, both were positive yet I fear that like all past schismatic circumstances ACNA will not go back far enough.
You said “When our thinking about God is formed by His trustworthy and commisioned authoritative messengers and what they say about Him, then we can find the unity in our faith”.
Do you really think we have done so?
I ask this question not for the sake of argument but because it forms the reasoning for my point. Please accept in truth, that I wish (and pray) to be shown that I am wrong, simply because I believe the time is drawing short. I earnestly pray, “Lord as you chose in times past to tarry for your purposes, I pray that you do so now…. And Yet… Even so, come Lord Jesus”.
Good Morning dear brother.
I have no doubt as to where Stuck in Toronto’s heart is and no doubt that when he writes it is perfectly clear to him as to exactly what he is saying. Same with Warren. Sometimes it is not so clear to me.
I know that as God works in each of us that sometimes His work is not as fast as we all would have it be, but as it is done, it is a perfect work.
Stuck….. As slow as it may seem, He (God) is doing a wonderful work in both of us…… as cryptic or blunt as either of us may be, He will soften our pen strokes and our words to the point that one day, you and I will not even recognize ourselves.
All of us must make an effort to see that we improve and one of my ways is to stay away from blogging quite so much at least until His work in me is a bit more advanced. Praise God.
Blessings to all,
Kate Hi, I wondered were you had gotten to! Welcome back! ….I think.
Warren – as usual you are confused, I said paddle not oar. That being said, a question if I may, If you stir the pot with two oars is the vortex created faster? Just wondering.
Have a great day you two – I’m off for a root canal.
Stuck in Toronto and Warren —– hint…. both, on the count of three, drop your oars… One …… Two…… Three
Gee I can’t keep up – Blessings to you Gerry – in a mighty way!!
Again Gerry – careful ol son I have a plate in my head!
#93 Ouch.
Since we’re so close, we might as well break the 100 barrier for comments on this thread.
Sure
Why