carroll@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Jeff Carroll) (01/07/90)
Are there any liturgically conservative Episcopalians/Anglicans on the net with feelings or advice to offer to those disenchanted with the current direction of the Episcopal Church who consider it important to remain in communion with Canterbury? Is this the right place to ask? Jeff Carroll carroll@atc.boeing.com
smith_c@gatech.edu (01/15/90)
In article <Jan.6.21.52.55.1990.6990@athos.rutgers.edu>, bcsaic!carroll@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Jeff Carroll) writes: > Are there any liturgically conservative Episcopalians/Anglicans on the > net with feelings or advice to offer to those disenchanted with the > current direction of the Episcopal Church who consider it important to > remain in communion with Canterbury? > > Is this the right place to ask? > > Jeff Carroll > carroll@atc.boeing.com I'm about as conservative as they come, and then some. I'm not sure exactly what you mean; with which current direction are you disenchanted? I'm somewhat disenchanted by the decision to ordain an openly homosexual priest. I think it's morally wrong. I don't feel there's a strong biblical basis for the condemnation of homosexuality among consenting adults; nevertheless, I think the practice is wrong, and the Episcopal Church should not ordain priest someone who has openly chosen to practice homosexuality. You're not referring to the Zebra debate, are you? If you're talking about inclusive language, I've looked seriously into the matter myself. In the Greek, the use of the masculine is often used to refer to both sexes. Often, when the text says "men" what it really means is "people"; I have no problem with inclusive language of this kind since it's actually a more accurate reflection of the Greek. On the other hand, referring to Christ as "the Human One" instead of "the Son of Man" I think is, well, yuckie. In fact, when I mentioned it to my priest before I was to read the second lesson one morning, she said, "Yeah, that's kind of yuckie; stick to the standard text." Be it known, I'm not a Greek scholar by any means, I've just read enough to have decided opinions on the matter. One thing I originally disliked, but have grown to appreciate, is saying, "the Lord, the God of Abraham and Sarah, etc." The God of our Fathers and our Mothers. On the other hand, I think this business of calling God "Creator, Redeemer, Sanctifier" in place of "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" is bad theology. The former is correct, after a fashion, but after all, Jesus is the Creator (see John), the Father is the Redeemer since he sent Jesus, Jesus is also the Sanctifier since he sends the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is also the Creator (an awesome wind from God swept over the waters), etc. Some people use the phrase as a gender-neutral expression for God; I find it distasteful. God is not an it. -- Sincerely, _///_ // SPAWN OF A JEWISH _///_ // _///_ // <`)= _<< CARPENTER _///_ //<`)= _<< <`)= _<< _///_ // \\\ \\ \\ _\\\_ <`)= _<< \\\ \\ \\\ \\ <`)= _<< >IXOYE=('> \\\ \\ \\\ \\_///_ // // /// _///_ // _///_ // gatech!ncsatl!smith_c <`)= _<< _///_ // <`)= _<< <`)= _<< \\\ \\<`)= _<< \\\ \\ \\\ \\ GO AGAINST THE FLOW! \\\ \\ A Real Live Catholic in Georgia
nrcgsh@ritcsh.cs.rit.edu (N.R. Coombs) (01/16/90)
I was interested in query about conservative Episcopalians. I guess I am on the conservative side theologically although rather on the liberal side politically and socially. Maybe we can get a support group here? Norman Coombs nrcgsh@ritvax.bitnet