with reference to the Thirty-nine Articles. I should say that these are not here just because I agree with large parts of them (which I do, but I have disagreements too at times), but because they add to the variety of content and also I do some of the initial donkey work before they may go on to the St. Mary's Barton-on-Humber parish church website. In that one sermon refers to his wife, a teacher of Old Testament for varieties of students, the cartoon here is of both, a happy picture at a fairly recent church social gathering celebrating someone's birthday.The Easter 02 sermon asks why so much emphasis on individualistic salvation and recommends a more collective view. This was something to which I gave a lot of thought with difficulty in coming to a conclusion (well salvation is problematic but whilst I'm with him about this emphasis on joining with the other I don't think, in the end, the individual can subsume into the collective). The Easter 03 sermon is similar in that, again, I kind of go along with the stance and then I think I want to go further still, as in my entry about the Giles Fraser controversy. David Rowett is (I'll stick my neck out) a sort of from above affirming full tradition but critically approaching parts person - and I'm not; I come to it from below, so to speak, in which every part is open to a critical approach prior to acceptance. He buys the package and passes an opinion, and I buy the parts and journey along according to the specific segments. Anyway it adds to the Anglican material.
1 comment:
I am continually astonished by the habit of Anglicans to bash the most distinguished thinker to hold the see of Canterbury.
The suggestion that Anselm based his conception of God on the despotic king, for example, seems to ignore the fact that Anselm, in addition to being a fine philosopher, was a courageous opponent of the king, and a champion of the Church's freedom, and suffered exile for it.
Post a Comment